Microsoft could, for example, create a WGA/OGA-style system that actually works well and is very difficult to get around. But they won't because having people switch to Linux or OpenOffice hurts them a lot harder than having people pirate windows or MS Office.
if they sell more than 50 then it's not 'unlimited' any more, you'll only be able to go backstage if 50 other people didn't get there first.
Sheesh, this is exactly like ISP's overselling 'unlimited' downloads when they know that if even a small fraction of their customers take them up on the offer then everyone is going to end up surfing at dialup speeds.
Re: "Why Public Libraries are just a Form of Theft"
you didn't notice that 'don't get paid' is a blue link. Guess where it goes? Same story..
BTW It's worth noting that Brian Edwards is probably better known for newscasting. You could reduce the term of copyright or eliminate it entirely and it really wouldn't change the news business at all.. there's not much of a market for copies of yesterday's news.
not so much 'slow them down' as 'stop them jamming'
The layout was supposed to put common pairs of letters at opposite ends of the keyboard so that as far as possible letters coming up wouldn't hit the previously typed letter coming back down right beside it.
I don't know how this explains pairs like 'de', 'es', 'er' and 'io' though. They're pretty common and still right beside each other on the keyboard.
We had a referendum recently, following up on a fairly controversial change of law under the previous government. 54% of the electoral roll voted, 87.6% of those voted NO.
--
Disclaimer:
By sending an email to any of my addresses you are agreeing that:
1. I am by definition, "the intended recipient"
2. All information in the email is mine to do with as I see fit and
make such financial profit, political mileage, or good joke as it
lends itself to.
3. I may take the contents as representing the views of your company.
4. This overrides any disclaimer or statement of confidentiality
that may be included on your message.
Because cellphone conversations (handheld or handsfree) are an external distraction. When you're talking to your passenger and they see a pedestrian step out in front of you or some other thing that you need to focus on, they'll instinctively stop talking and let you focus on driving. The person talking to you on the cellphone has no idea of your driving environment and will keep talking, and will expect you to be listening to them.
I am particularly aware of this because my wife doesn't drive, has never learned any driving skills and therefore frequently keeps talking at times when I need to concentrate, and it's bloody distracting.
Funny thing; I did register at this site, after months of anonymous reading and the occasional comment. But if all the content had been behind a registration wall I guarantee you I would just gone elsewhere and never given this site a second look.
Copyright infringement is a SERIOUS crime worthy of ~USD$2million fines for a couple of CDs worth.. Compared to this burglary, rape and murder are barely worth the effort required to investigate and prosecute them.
"In many application categories straighforward thinking ahead allows you to come up with patentable ideas. " -- Bill Gates, Challenges and Strategy, May 16, 1991
Wait, what?!! How do ideas that come from "straighforward thinking ahead" meet the requirement for non-obviousness?
AC's comments are hilarious because even in this very article you've already said the better labels can "still provide essential infrastructure such as distribution, publicity, financing, promotion and expertise" and "what worked for Joe may not work for someone else. Each situation has a unique path between band and fan."
Not "all labels are buggy whip makers".
Not "everyone can just do exactly what works for NiN"
Do the AC's even read the articles before trying to pretend that you're making the strawman argument they'd like you to be making?
"In the No need to convince anyone of anything... The Laws are the Laws, and pissing and moaning about them from those that create nothing is going to do nothing to change them. "
Or perhaps I should parody your statement?
In the end, breaking the 55mph speed limit is only going to shift the penalties from fines to jail time.
In the end, all this bootlegging is going to do is put more distillers and rum-runners in prison.
Or to quote Cory Doctrow (because I can; it's so great that I can pretty freely copy his ideas without fear of getting sued!) "before the radio and the record came along the only way that people made money from making music was by standing in a hall and being charismatic. The fact is, technology giveth and technology taketh away. What was the business model in 1909 may be the business model in 2009. What was the business model in 1939 may not be the business model in 2007. That's how it goes."
Google have the framework in place for rightsholders to upload a sample of their own content, automatically identify all of the videos on youtube where that content appears (even if it's not bit-for-bit identical; even when it's just background music like in this video) and then choose what to do about that content. They don't need the assistance or permission of the video's uploader to do any of this.
Sony have chosen to treat the video as a free viral advertisement for the music, adding a link so that people can buy the CD or mp3 download. As a result Chris brown is in the top ten on itunes and amazon, and everyone is making a shitload more money.
Warner Music Group generally opt to take the video down or remove the soundtrack. as a result they get no advertising revenue or promotional benefit at all. Also everyone thinks they're a bunch of assholes, just read some of the comments on videos where the soundtrack has been stripped..
Claim it as a 'work for hire' and have God assigned the copyright. The church as God's chosen representatives can then release it under an appropriate copyleft license or gift it to the public domain.
As with all 'content', things are copyright by default even if they're made freely avaliable on the web, and I don't quite see why putting something in an rss/xml feed makes it any less copyright than just putting it up as ordinary html.
Try applying this whole argument to Creative Commons for example; http://wiki.creativecommons.org/RDFa anyone? Are they also making content "less useful" by putting tags on such as 'share alike' or 'non-commercial'?
On the post: Steve Ballmer Declares 'Free Is Not A Business Model' -- Apparently Unfamiliar With Microsoft's Free Products
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070312/165448.shtml
Microsoft could, for example, create a WGA/OGA-style system that actually works well and is very difficult to get around. But they won't because having people switch to Linux or OpenOffice hurts them a lot harder than having people pirate windows or MS Office.
On the post: Public Enemy Trying To Get A Little Help From Its Friends
Re: Re: Re: @Dark Helmet
Sheesh, this is exactly like ISP's overselling 'unlimited' downloads when they know that if even a small fraction of their customers take them up on the offer then everyone is going to end up surfing at dialup speeds.
On the post: Focusing In On The Value: Google Books Provides An Amazing Resource
Re: "Why Public Libraries are just a Form of Theft"
BTW It's worth noting that Brian Edwards is probably better known for newscasting. You could reduce the term of copyright or eliminate it entirely and it really wouldn't change the news business at all.. there's not much of a market for copies of yesterday's news.
On the post: Shooting Down The Claim That The AK-47 Needed Intellectual Property Protection
Re: Re: Side note on Dvorak
The layout was supposed to put common pairs of letters at opposite ends of the keyboard so that as far as possible letters coming up wouldn't hit the previously typed letter coming back down right beside it.
I don't know how this explains pairs like 'de', 'es', 'er' and 'io' though. They're pretty common and still right beside each other on the keyboard.
On the post: New Zealand Says You Can't Use Your Mobile Phone For Navigation While Driving
Re:
We had a referendum recently, following up on a fairly controversial change of law under the previous government. 54% of the electoral roll voted, 87.6% of those voted NO.
You think they listened?
http://www.voteno.org.nz/polls.htm
On the post: Win Or Lose, This Video Game Deletes Files On Your Computer
Re: Virus Killer
Virus Killer doesn't delete any of your files, but it does display actual file and folder names from your home directory during the game.
On the post: Bank Sends Confidential Email To Wrong Address, Hauls Google To Court To Figure Out Who Got The Email
Disclaimer:
By sending an email to any of my addresses you are agreeing that:
1. I am by definition, "the intended recipient"
2. All information in the email is mine to do with as I see fit and
make such financial profit, political mileage, or good joke as it
lends itself to.
3. I may take the contents as representing the views of your company.
4. This overrides any disclaimer or statement of confidentiality
that may be included on your message.
On the post: Waste Of Money: Pro-Linux Group Has To Buy Microsoft Patents
Re:
That's basically how OIN works.
On the post: Is The Kindle's Antisocial Nature Holding It Back?
Re: It was simple to see, too
You mean like the Zune?
Point well made ;)
On the post: German Judge: If Sex While Driving Is Legal, Why Isn't Driving While Phoning?
Re: Obvious, really...
Because cellphone conversations (handheld or handsfree) are an external distraction. When you're talking to your passenger and they see a pedestrian step out in front of you or some other thing that you need to focus on, they'll instinctively stop talking and let you focus on driving. The person talking to you on the cellphone has no idea of your driving environment and will keep talking, and will expect you to be listening to them.
I am particularly aware of this because my wife doesn't drive, has never learned any driving skills and therefore frequently keeps talking at times when I need to concentrate, and it's bloody distracting.
On the post: Newspapers And The Saywall: Lots Of Talking... Few Paywalls
Re: Do they even realize?
On the post: Home Burglar Returns To Taunt Couple Via Facebook?
Re: police
Copyright infringement is a SERIOUS crime worthy of ~USD$2million fines for a couple of CDs worth.. Compared to this burglary, rape and murder are barely worth the effort required to investigate and prosecute them.
On the post: Just Because Something's New Doesn't Mean It's Not Obvious
A little-quoted part of an often quoted memo..
Wait, what?!! How do ideas that come from "straighforward thinking ahead" meet the requirement for non-obviousness?
On the post: Don Bartlett Explains How Joe Pug Gave Away Free CDs To Connect With Fans
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Who?
Not "all labels are buggy whip makers".
Not "everyone can just do exactly what works for NiN"
Do the AC's even read the articles before trying to pretend that you're making the strawman argument they'd like you to be making?
On the post: Copyright Cops Go After Town For Creating Little Mermaid Statue
Re: Re:
Or perhaps I should parody your statement?
In the end, breaking the 55mph speed limit is only going to shift the penalties from fines to jail time.
In the end, all this bootlegging is going to do is put more distillers and rum-runners in prison.
Or to quote Cory Doctrow (because I can; it's so great that I can pretty freely copy his ideas without fear of getting sued!) "before the radio and the record came along the only way that people made money from making music was by standing in a hall and being charismatic. The fact is, technology giveth and technology taketh away. What was the business model in 1909 may be the business model in 2009. What was the business model in 1939 may not be the business model in 2007. That's how it goes."
On the post: Oh Look, Viral Video On YouTube Boosting Sales... And Reputation For Chris Brown
Re: Re:
Google have the framework in place for rightsholders to upload a sample of their own content, automatically identify all of the videos on youtube where that content appears (even if it's not bit-for-bit identical; even when it's just background music like in this video) and then choose what to do about that content. They don't need the assistance or permission of the video's uploader to do any of this.
Sony have chosen to treat the video as a free viral advertisement for the music, adding a link so that people can buy the CD or mp3 download. As a result Chris brown is in the top ten on itunes and amazon, and everyone is making a shitload more money.
Warner Music Group generally opt to take the video down or remove the soundtrack. as a result they get no advertising revenue or promotional benefit at all. Also everyone thinks they're a bunch of assholes, just read some of the comments on videos where the soundtrack has been stripped..
On the post: Patents On Common Beans Rejected 10 Years Too Late
Re:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn965-wheel-patented-in-australia.html
On the post: This Is Wrong: 'Without The Content Industries, The Internet Would Be Empty'
Re: Re: I hate to agree, but ...
— Dr. Cox, Scrubs
On the post: Indonesian Artists Refuse Copyright As Being Against Their Religious Beliefs
Why is this so hard?
On the post: Dear AP: The Point Behind A Data Format Is To Make The Data Easier To Use, Not Harder
"copyright by default"
Try applying this whole argument to Creative Commons for example; http://wiki.creativecommons.org/RDFa anyone? Are they also making content "less useful" by putting tags on such as 'share alike' or 'non-commercial'?
Next >>