Re: Sadly the exact opposite is almost always true.
You are partially right on the Apple end of things. They were renowned for stealing ideas from others and making them their own. BUT Apple was actually founded on the original Mac that Steve Wozniak created as a hobby. The blue box was a small business that the Steves ran before starting Apple from the hobbyist computer.
Most of what Apple made after that came from ideas stolen from others (Xerox and many others). Jobs couldn't have an original idea to save his life.
But he could take others original ideas and make them a whole lot better and his skills with design, esthetics, and user-friendly-ness were uncanny. That is where his creativity and originality comes from. Even then most of that was inspired by other ideas and concepts that he learned. He just applied them in very creative ways.
Ironically there is really nothing wrong with being inspired by others original ideas and then improving upon them. That is part of innovation. Apple and Jobs just had a problem with others that innovated off of inspiration from Apple products. That is where the rub is.
You can't own and idea, only the expression of an idea. He got inspiration from the twins, but the end product of Facebook (in its original form) was not the idea the twins introduced to him at all. They just wanted a site to meet girls with. He made a full on social network.
It is ironic how the tables have turned. Hollywood was created by those that wanted to create entertainment and content but needed to avoid prohibitive license fees and contracts. Doing so allowed them to do what they loved and create great movies without the restrictions that Edison tried to put on them.
Fast forward to today. Now in the Internet age we have people that want to create new content that are running to the Internet and its underground to avoid the repressive, restrictive controls and contracts of Hollywood so that they can do what they love and create great movies, music, books, and other content.
Its history repeating itself, just in a slightly different way. Why can't people learn from history? Especially their own?
Can we rename him the esteemed senator "Chancellor Palpatine" Dodd? I can just see him in a hood and cloak slithering about while griping on and on about those darn Jedis (pirates). I can even imagine him with the red eyes and thin pale disfigured skin. Though that isn't much of a leap from his current appearance.
You idiot, he was not talking about granting a license and for fair use you don't need a license. The point was he tested the waters to see if they would even hint at the possibility of potentially, maybe, threatening to sue him over the paper and the results of that test were enough to scare him away from publishing.
The company knows that this is sufficient to stop people like him and doing so is still a form of copyfraud. It wasn't blatant yet because no act was actually committed on either side. But the mere hinting of a threat is still a mild form of copyfraud.
That said I think Mike's friend needs to nut up and publish it. You can't go through life being afraid of everything.
Why can't the research be published without this one image? Is it that pivotal to his work? If it isn't then he should just remove the image and publish the rest. Its sad that your friend won't stand up for his own rights.
So do the patent examiners not have a digital text search? Seriously how the hell was this not caught when these patents were issued so recently? This seems like it should be illegal.
Congress really needs to leave the internet alone. They obviously don't have a clue with what they are doing. These old farts don't know the first thing about the internet and should never try to regulate it for that very reason.
It would be like having a rock star tell a Doctor what would be the best surgical procedure to use to treat a severe medical condition. They don't have enough working knowledge to make any such calls and any calls they do make will be horribly misinformed and highly dangerous.
That woman shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a government job. She is not a public servant like she claims. She is a money-grubbing lawyer and copyright industry whore. She is probably trying to ensure she has a sweet job lined up after her term as a "public servant" is up.
What she said was disgusting, short-sighted, hateful, ignorant, and devolved. She made references to the Jetsons and Bladerunner having physical books shown in the futuristic stories as evidence that we cannot imagine a future without physical books. Yet she completely skips over the fact that those were both written 30+ years ago. Long before digital distributing was really conceivable to most people.
On top of that she shows an almost hatred toward the public (yes I watched and listened to the entire video) and the public domain. The only exceptions she makes are for things like libraries. Then she goes on to say that we couldn't have creative works and culture without publishers and copyright. Yet the internet is proving that wrong every single day.
This woman is incompetent and spiteful towards the public. She should be fired and fined. That was a stones throw away from being a hate speech.
As far as I am concerned, unless I have committed a violent act prior to arrest or given good cause to believe I may be hiding something on my person that is dangerous or illegal there is no excuse for strip searching me.
So I would put it this way to the guards doing the search:
"Bring me a warrant to search me or bring me my lawyer and keep your hands off me. If you touch me without that warrant I will consider it assault and attempted murder and I will invoke my right to self defense. At which point I will use any and all methods at my disposal to defend and protect myself. I respect that you are trying to just do your job, but that job does not include violating my rights. The rights which I am allowed to defend. Be professional and don't violate my rights and everything will remain peaceful and fine."
Basically I would make it clear that I don't intend to harm nor wish to harm the person charged with searching me. But if they do attempt to do so without legal cause I will protect myself and my rights with all due respect. If this means that I break some contradictory laws in the process so be it. I don't like those that abuse their power and I hate bullies with a passion that burns very brightly.
If this guy is serious in the article's entirety then the first thing I want to point out is that the phrase "romantic evening" and "Buffalo Wild Wings" do not belong in the same sentence (or paragraph for that matter). If he considers that a romantic place to take a date then I can assure you that we are dealing with a bible belt white trash bible thumper. And thus his opinion can be immediately ruled ignorant and invalid on those grounds alone.
The next thing I want to point out is that religious arguments have no place in government affairs. You can practice whatever religion you want, but our very constitution speaks to the separation of church and state and I do not appreciate all the nutjobs out there that keep trying to cram their religious injunctions down our throats. Especially when they are not even legally allowed to.
Don't tell me what to practice and I won't tell you what to practice (which would inevitably involve telling you where to stick it).
Is it just me or have politicians worldwide become a lot more psychotic over the last 10-20 years? It seems everywhere I turn I am hearing about more and more insanity coming from the universe in which politicians exist. I personally don't want any in power.
I would rather go back to series of much smaller city-states that work together to achieve a common goal rather than this disconnected political royalty class that we have now that don't understand the world and are either terrified of it or hate it.
Its like Abe Simpson once said "I used to be with it, but then they changed what it was. Now what I'm with isn't it, and what's it seems weird and scary to me, and it'll happen to you, too."
Another possibility is that politicians have always been this insane and corrupt. Its just that the internet has helped us open our eyes to it because before the internet we had to rely on a mass media system that had its own agendas that are controlled by the rich and powerful (including politicians in some cases). So a lot just happened right under our noses before.
I think your being a bit hard on these guys. It seems more like the confusing complexity of copyright is the real failure here. It lead them to believe that they needed far more copyright protection than they really did. It just isn't clear cut enough. Its lame, but it seems like they just took the ignorant approach of covering their asses.
They Don't Deserve any Trademark/Patent/Copyright Rights
This is insane and another example of one of the biggest failings of the law around trademarks, patents, and copyrights. There are no significant punishments for tyrants such as Summit Entertainment. The punishment should be graded into levels.
- First abuse offense should result in a warning (because people and companies make mistakes, all of us know that).
- The second should be a fine of $10,000.
- The third should be fine of $500,000.
- The fourth should be a temporary block on all legal action from the company lasting a minimum of 6 months as well as a fine of $10 million.
- The fifth should be a fine of $250 million, a 2 year ban on legal action from the company, and a 2 year disbarment of all the involved lawyers and law firms from the legal action end.
- Finally the sixth should be a fine of $500 million, a complete forfeiture of all trademarks, patents, and copyrights currently owned by the company/individual, AND permanent disbarment of all the lawyers involved.
The idea is to make them absolutely radioactive to continue to do business with as a lawyer or legal institution and to prevent others from doing the same thing in the future.
I feel the same way about intellectual property. To lock up knowledge and force everyone to agree that you own that knowledge and/or idea is lunacy. Who owns language? Who owns walking or running? Who owns the knowledge of how to build a fire? No one owns those things and I know of no one who would argue that someone should.
Well it looks like Yahoo! has entered the final stages of dying/grief. I believe this is the bargaining stage. All they have left is depression and acceptance. The prognosis isn't good. I give them a year, maybe two.
So it looks like I need a new spam email account. Damn, I will have to redirect a lot of crap from my Yahoo! Mail now.
On the post: Chris Dodd Rewrites Hollywood's History To Pretend That It Came About Because Of IP Laws
Re: Sadly the exact opposite is almost always true.
Most of what Apple made after that came from ideas stolen from others (Xerox and many others). Jobs couldn't have an original idea to save his life.
But he could take others original ideas and make them a whole lot better and his skills with design, esthetics, and user-friendly-ness were uncanny. That is where his creativity and originality comes from. Even then most of that was inspired by other ideas and concepts that he learned. He just applied them in very creative ways.
Ironically there is really nothing wrong with being inspired by others original ideas and then improving upon them. That is part of innovation. Apple and Jobs just had a problem with others that innovated off of inspiration from Apple products. That is where the rub is.
On the post: Chris Dodd Rewrites Hollywood's History To Pretend That It Came About Because Of IP Laws
Re: What about the twins?
On the post: Chris Dodd Rewrites Hollywood's History To Pretend That It Came About Because Of IP Laws
Re: Re:
Fast forward to today. Now in the Internet age we have people that want to create new content that are running to the Internet and its underground to avoid the repressive, restrictive controls and contracts of Hollywood so that they can do what they love and create great movies, music, books, and other content.
Its history repeating itself, just in a slightly different way. Why can't people learn from history? Especially their own?
On the post: Chris Dodd Rewrites Hollywood's History To Pretend That It Came About Because Of IP Laws
Re: Re: Re: Chris Dodd...
On the post: Chris Dodd Rewrites Hollywood's History To Pretend That It Came About Because Of IP Laws
Re: Re: Re: Re: Chris Dodd...
On the post: Chris Dodd Rewrites Hollywood's History To Pretend That It Came About Because Of IP Laws
Re: Re: Re: Re: Chris Dodd...
On the post: The Chilling Effects Of Copyfraud: Blocking A Researcher From Fair Use... And Scaring Him Into Staying Quiet About It
Re: Re: Re:
The company knows that this is sufficient to stop people like him and doing so is still a form of copyfraud. It wasn't blatant yet because no act was actually committed on either side. But the mere hinting of a threat is still a mild form of copyfraud.
That said I think Mike's friend needs to nut up and publish it. You can't go through life being afraid of everything.
On the post: The Chilling Effects Of Copyfraud: Blocking A Researcher From Fair Use... And Scaring Him Into Staying Quiet About It
Can the research work without that one image?
On the post: The Social Networking Patent Thicket Consists Of At Least 30,000 Patents
Searching
On the post: Did Congress Really Not Pay Attention To What Happened With SOPA? CISPA Ignorance Is Astounding
Doctors vs Rock Stars
It would be like having a rock star tell a Doctor what would be the best surgical procedure to use to treat a severe medical condition. They don't have enough working knowledge to make any such calls and any calls they do make will be horribly misinformed and highly dangerous.
On the post: How Can You Be Register Of Copyrights If You Don't Even Understand Copyright's Most Basic Purpose?
Wow
What she said was disgusting, short-sighted, hateful, ignorant, and devolved. She made references to the Jetsons and Bladerunner having physical books shown in the futuristic stories as evidence that we cannot imagine a future without physical books. Yet she completely skips over the fact that those were both written 30+ years ago. Long before digital distributing was really conceivable to most people.
On top of that she shows an almost hatred toward the public (yes I watched and listened to the entire video) and the public domain. The only exceptions she makes are for things like libraries. Then she goes on to say that we couldn't have creative works and culture without publishers and copyright. Yet the internet is proving that wrong every single day.
This woman is incompetent and spiteful towards the public. She should be fired and fined. That was a stones throw away from being a hate speech.
On the post: Supreme Court Says You Can Be Strip Searched When Admitted To Jails For Any Offense
I wouldn't put up with this crap.
So I would put it this way to the guards doing the search:
"Bring me a warrant to search me or bring me my lawyer and keep your hands off me. If you touch me without that warrant I will consider it assault and attempted murder and I will invoke my right to self defense. At which point I will use any and all methods at my disposal to defend and protect myself. I respect that you are trying to just do your job, but that job does not include violating my rights. The rights which I am allowed to defend. Be professional and don't violate my rights and everything will remain peaceful and fine."
Basically I would make it clear that I don't intend to harm nor wish to harm the person charged with searching me. But if they do attempt to do so without legal cause I will protect myself and my rights with all due respect. If this means that I break some contradictory laws in the process so be it. I don't like those that abuse their power and I hate bullies with a passion that burns very brightly.
On the post: Glory Be To The Window Seat: A Bizarre 'Spiritual' Defense Of The FAA's Airplane Gadget Ban
Romantic huh?
The next thing I want to point out is that religious arguments have no place in government affairs. You can practice whatever religion you want, but our very constitution speaks to the separation of church and state and I do not appreciate all the nutjobs out there that keep trying to cram their religious injunctions down our throats. Especially when they are not even legally allowed to.
Don't tell me what to practice and I won't tell you what to practice (which would inevitably involve telling you where to stick it).
On the post: Sarkozy Seeks To Criminalize 'Habitually Visiting' Websites About Violence
Political Psychosis
I would rather go back to series of much smaller city-states that work together to achieve a common goal rather than this disconnected political royalty class that we have now that don't understand the world and are either terrified of it or hate it.
Its like Abe Simpson once said "I used to be with it, but then they changed what it was. Now what I'm with isn't it, and what's it seems weird and scary to me, and it'll happen to you, too."
Another possibility is that politicians have always been this insane and corrupt. Its just that the internet has helped us open our eyes to it because before the internet we had to rely on a mass media system that had its own agendas that are controlled by the rich and powerful (including politicians in some cases). So a lot just happened right under our noses before.
On the post: Sarkozy Seeks To Criminalize 'Habitually Visiting' Websites About Violence
Re:
On the post: British National Arts Program Aims To Rob Thousands Of Kids Of Their Copyrights
Seems more like an ignorant mistake
On the post: Summit Entertainment Claims To Own The Date November 20, 2009; Issues Takedown On Art Created On That Day
Re:
On the post: Summit Entertainment Claims To Own The Date November 20, 2009; Issues Takedown On Art Created On That Day
They Don't Deserve any Trademark/Patent/Copyright Rights
- First abuse offense should result in a warning (because people and companies make mistakes, all of us know that).
- The second should be a fine of $10,000.
- The third should be fine of $500,000.
- The fourth should be a temporary block on all legal action from the company lasting a minimum of 6 months as well as a fine of $10 million.
- The fifth should be a fine of $250 million, a 2 year ban on legal action from the company, and a 2 year disbarment of all the involved lawyers and law firms from the legal action end.
- Finally the sixth should be a fine of $500 million, a complete forfeiture of all trademarks, patents, and copyrights currently owned by the company/individual, AND permanent disbarment of all the lawyers involved.
The idea is to make them absolutely radioactive to continue to do business with as a lawyer or legal institution and to prevent others from doing the same thing in the future.
On the post: Thinking Of Copyright As Property Is As Natural As Thinking Of Smells As Property
Intellectual Property
On the post: Delusions Of Grandeur: Yahoo Officially Sues Facebook, Laughably Argues That Facebook's Entire Model Is Based On Yahoo
The Stages of Dying/Grief
So it looks like I need a new spam email account. Damn, I will have to redirect a lot of crap from my Yahoo! Mail now.
Next >>