Non-gamer and non-techy view point here, so apologies if I'm missing a key point, but I'd have read them as useful descriptions rather than keyword spam?
A bit like the "other people who bought this also bought" stuff on Amazon, a feature that, as a customer, I find really useful.
I guess I'm missing something though?
Surely the point of this story was not whether or nor you SHOULD ask for permission but rather that the mechanism has become so screwed up that it's almost impossible to do it?
Sorry about the delay in replying, gig this weekend so been a bit busy.
I've had to read this comment a few times to try to understand what points you're making, so here goes...
Perhaps I wasn't clear on my first comment, I meant: why is it a default assumption by critics of this site that users of this site are file-sharers?*
"How often do you think the subject of piracy and copyright came up for music fans before the Napster era?"
Um, do you recall the ludicrous "home taping is killing music campaigns"? It was junk then and it's junk now, there is a finite amount of cash, and a near infinite amount of content. Loads of studies have shown that those who pirate music buy more music. Exactly the same as I used to when I had a tape-to-tape.
"And the discussion was usually about getting a copyright on your songs to protect your work and your rights. It was always considered a good thing."
I think part of the issue here is that the internet has changed things. People understand that physical goods have a cost to manufacture and distribute, they understand that there's a basic unit cost that needs to be met. The basic unit cost for a digital file is near-zero, that has changed the game but the copyright maximalists (as opposed to those who are simply pro-copyright**) refuse to acknowledge this; that puts them at odds with the wider public.
"But I sure don't recall endless discussions about how copyright should be abolished or musicians should adapt"
Again, same point, the world has changed, you have to adapt. You can't pretend that the internet is going to go away or legislate your way back to 1970.
"You understand that just as you feel some things seem like a problem for you, like *worrying* about *maybe* *possibly* not being able to distribute something through a torrent, that massive amounts of infringement that is not just a possibility but a reality and has been for over a decade seems like kind of a problem for people in music, movies, books, and all the rest."
Now you're just being dismissive. Pirate bay is blocked in the UK by court order. I'm not *worrying* about *maybe* something happening. Restrictions are being applied right now. Infringement is happening yes, but even the RIAA accepts that it's not in the numbers they've been claiming for the last few years. The tools to tackle that infringement exist by means of adapting their business models, but the legacy industries aren't taking that action.
Instead they're trying to shit on a load of legitimate tools and innovation wherever they find it. They are setting themselves up as the bad guys and then complaining when people treat them as such.
* I'm not going to say "pirates" because it's just a ridiculous word for anything other than illegal maritime activity.
** Like Mike for example - pro-copyright, but not a maximalist
To be fair Rikuo, i think you may be mis-understanding which 3-strikes law Bob was talking about. There's the internet 3-strikes law and then there's the 3-felonies-and-it's-life 3-strikes law. I think it's the latter that Bob was on about but I can't be arsed to find which article it was on.
"So downloading copies of albums and movies (piracy) and so on is not on your list? So if piracy was stopped without prohibiting your day to day needs, you'd be fine and happy."
Nope, I don't pirate anything online. Why is this a default assumption for critics of this site? If you can think of any serious way of preventing online file sharing that doesn't infringe on legitimate uses then I would love to hear it. As would a whole load of other people. And yes, I would have no problems with it at all.
"What websites are you not allowed to look at? What material do you distribute using torrents?"
Under current UK law looking at any website that stores any copyrighted material to cache is actually a crime. That's obvioulsy a ridiculous situation but it's also the kind of bad laws that are being passed under pressure from the entertainment industry.
The material I want to distribute via torrent is my material, the stuff I write. Additionally I have some other musician friends who want people to seed their stuff as well.
"I've got to say that the things you are worried about don't seem like all that big of a deal to me. These seem like big big problems to you?"
Yes, yes they do seem like problems to me. Partly because they impact on me right now, and partly because they represent a step on an ever-increasing expansion of restrictions imposed by an industry that won't adapt.
damn straight. Morrison's argument is a lot like our local favourite Mr Lowery's about how there are fewer professional musicians.
So the fuck what?
The contents of the top forty is mostly produced by professional musicians, frankly I'd rather listen to an open mic night in my local pub.
So I do.
But the decline in recorded music sales is down to piracy for sure...
I'm sure PirateMikeShill (PMS for short?) will be along soon to add that his list.
Of course it might be he/she just has a search routine that looks for text strings like that and triggers an automatic comment posting. Which would explain why they rarely have any relevance to the actual point being made in the original post.
Yeah but then you're just playing whac-a-mole; techdirt.co.uk, techdirt.org, techdirt.xxx (no wait, i think that's taken), techydirt.com etc etc. All of these would spring up over night. Mike's probably got a trip switch somewhere ready to switch things over once someone at ICE learns how to do a search and realises what we're saying about them.
Looking at a website, copying a song from a cd to my pc, getting round the drm so I can watch a DVD I bought on a locked-down machine, using the most popular torrent site to distribute my material.
These kinds of things.
Started with a good point, then cheapened it with a limp dig at the end.
To address your point: no, I agree with you, they should have the rights to what other industries do.
But it should be recognised as lobbying and recorded as such - and yes, this should be the case for every industry.
And then the rules should be enforced.
Please keep the debate coming, but please lay off with the unnecessary digs.
... but I'm now going to make up a load of conclusions that I've drawn because it fits the conversation in my head and the comment that I want to write.
Comedy's not really my field but I reckon a bit of time on youtube and facebook will probably fairly quickly find you some examples of people now making their way up.
I still maintain that there is a massive role for all kinds of middlemen and enablers, as long as they're adding value.
What both creators and customers are becoming increasingly intolerant of is those entities that serve only to restrict the channels between the two - what Mike would call Gatekeepers.
On the post: The Pending Kodak Patent Auction May Create Weapons Of Business Destruction
Re: Patent Abolition
Question 1: how many politicians come from a legal background vs a technical background?
Question 2: who profits from patent litigation?
On the post: Google's App Crackdown Results In Indie Developer Smackdown
Re: Re: Game Developers and Descriptions
A bit like the "other people who bought this also bought" stuff on Amazon, a feature that, as a customer, I find really useful.
I guess I'm missing something though?
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re:
On the post: Alex Day Sells Half A Million Songs By Breaking All The 'Rules'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Songwriters?
I've had to read this comment a few times to try to understand what points you're making, so here goes...
Perhaps I wasn't clear on my first comment, I meant: why is it a default assumption by critics of this site that users of this site are file-sharers?*
"How often do you think the subject of piracy and copyright came up for music fans before the Napster era?"
Um, do you recall the ludicrous "home taping is killing music campaigns"? It was junk then and it's junk now, there is a finite amount of cash, and a near infinite amount of content. Loads of studies have shown that those who pirate music buy more music. Exactly the same as I used to when I had a tape-to-tape.
"And the discussion was usually about getting a copyright on your songs to protect your work and your rights. It was always considered a good thing."
I think part of the issue here is that the internet has changed things. People understand that physical goods have a cost to manufacture and distribute, they understand that there's a basic unit cost that needs to be met. The basic unit cost for a digital file is near-zero, that has changed the game but the copyright maximalists (as opposed to those who are simply pro-copyright**) refuse to acknowledge this; that puts them at odds with the wider public.
"But I sure don't recall endless discussions about how copyright should be abolished or musicians should adapt"
Again, same point, the world has changed, you have to adapt. You can't pretend that the internet is going to go away or legislate your way back to 1970.
"You understand that just as you feel some things seem like a problem for you, like *worrying* about *maybe* *possibly* not being able to distribute something through a torrent, that massive amounts of infringement that is not just a possibility but a reality and has been for over a decade seems like kind of a problem for people in music, movies, books, and all the rest."
Now you're just being dismissive. Pirate bay is blocked in the UK by court order. I'm not *worrying* about *maybe* something happening. Restrictions are being applied right now. Infringement is happening yes, but even the RIAA accepts that it's not in the numbers they've been claiming for the last few years. The tools to tackle that infringement exist by means of adapting their business models, but the legacy industries aren't taking that action.
Instead they're trying to shit on a load of legitimate tools and innovation wherever they find it. They are setting themselves up as the bad guys and then complaining when people treat them as such.
* I'm not going to say "pirates" because it's just a ridiculous word for anything other than illegal maritime activity.
** Like Mike for example - pro-copyright, but not a maximalist
On the post: App Developer: Android OS Built For Piracy And Consumer Choice Sucks
Re:
On the post: NY Times Picks Up On The Fact That Craigslist Has Become A Legal Bully Against Anyone Who Makes Its Site Better
Re:
On the post: Is This Real? Is This Recall? MPAA Hosts Screening Of Total Recall To 'Educate' Congress On 'Benefits' Of IP Protection
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You're also assuming that I agree with everything Mike writes; I don't.
On the post: Alex Day Sells Half A Million Songs By Breaking All The 'Rules'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Songwriters?
Nope, I don't pirate anything online. Why is this a default assumption for critics of this site? If you can think of any serious way of preventing online file sharing that doesn't infringe on legitimate uses then I would love to hear it. As would a whole load of other people. And yes, I would have no problems with it at all.
"What websites are you not allowed to look at? What material do you distribute using torrents?"
Under current UK law looking at any website that stores any copyrighted material to cache is actually a crime. That's obvioulsy a ridiculous situation but it's also the kind of bad laws that are being passed under pressure from the entertainment industry.
The material I want to distribute via torrent is my material, the stuff I write. Additionally I have some other musician friends who want people to seed their stuff as well.
"I've got to say that the things you are worried about don't seem like all that big of a deal to me. These seem like big big problems to you?"
Yes, yes they do seem like problems to me. Partly because they impact on me right now, and partly because they represent a step on an ever-increasing expansion of restrictions imposed by an industry that won't adapt.
On the post: US Has Ignored New Zealand Court Order To Return Data It Seized From Megaupload
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Did You Know That Professional Writing Is Dying And Only Taxing The Public To Pay Writers Can Save It
Re: Amateurism Is Good.
So the fuck what?
The contents of the top forty is mostly produced by professional musicians, frankly I'd rather listen to an open mic night in my local pub.
So I do.
But the decline in recorded music sales is down to piracy for sure...
On the post: US Has Ignored New Zealand Court Order To Return Data It Seized From Megaupload
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Is This Real? Is This Recall? MPAA Hosts Screening Of Total Recall To 'Educate' Congress On 'Benefits' Of IP Protection
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Of course it might be he/she just has a search routine that looks for text strings like that and triggers an automatic comment posting. Which would explain why they rarely have any relevance to the actual point being made in the original post.
On the post: Sometimes The Business Model Is The Marketing
Re:
Alternatively...
Yeah but then you're just playing whac-a-mole; techdirt.co.uk, techdirt.org, techdirt.xxx (no wait, i think that's taken), techydirt.com etc etc. All of these would spring up over night. Mike's probably got a trip switch somewhere ready to switch things over once someone at ICE learns how to do a search and realises what we're saying about them.
On the post: Alex Day Sells Half A Million Songs By Breaking All The 'Rules'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Songwriters?
These kinds of things.
On the post: Homeland Security Issuing Its Own DMCA Takedowns On YouTube To Stifle Speech
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Embarrassment
On the post: Homeland Security Issuing Its Own DMCA Takedowns On YouTube To Stifle Speech
Re: Re: Re: Re: Embarrassment
On the post: Is This Real? Is This Recall? MPAA Hosts Screening Of Total Recall To 'Educate' Congress On 'Benefits' Of IP Protection
Re:
To address your point: no, I agree with you, they should have the rights to what other industries do.
But it should be recognised as lobbying and recorded as such - and yes, this should be the case for every industry.
And then the rules should be enforced.
Please keep the debate coming, but please lay off with the unnecessary digs.
On the post: Homeland Security Issuing Its Own DMCA Takedowns On YouTube To Stifle Speech
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Is This Real? Is This Recall? MPAA Hosts Screening Of Total Recall To 'Educate' Congress On 'Benefits' Of IP Protection
Re: Re: Re:
... but I'm now going to make up a load of conclusions that I've drawn because it fits the conversation in my head and the comment that I want to write.
On the post: Patton Oswalt Explains That There Are No More Gatekeepers In Entertainment
Re:
I still maintain that there is a massive role for all kinds of middlemen and enablers, as long as they're adding value.
What both creators and customers are becoming increasingly intolerant of is those entities that serve only to restrict the channels between the two - what Mike would call Gatekeepers.
Next >>