What does Miss Manners @ NYT suggest be done in order to stem this most egregious breach of table manners?
OK, so you first say that commenting on table manners in public is uncommon and then immediately reference Miss Manners, one of the most well-known examples of how table manners are discussed in public. Do you even read your comments before posting them?
Who cares whether other families eat at the table together, it really is not your concern.
You make it sound like it's wrong to comment on anything unless is has a direct effect on you. This is absurd in this case and it's absurd when people use the same lame logic to fault Techdirt for suggesting ways that the music or movie industry can improve their business models because Techdirt isn't in those businesses.
As for the actual topic of texting while at the dinner, what's wrong with commenting on this? Is it any more rude if someone is reading a comic book or playing a handheld game? No, but it's the same principle applied to modern technology.
If it was wrong or uninteresting to read about the same themes in the context of new situations made possible by technology, then no one would read Techdirt.
In my opinion, the answer is because the members of the RIAA and MPAA don't complain. If you belong to an organization that strongarms the public into paying far more than it deserves and you share in those inflated "profits", you're not going to complain if the organization takes its cut.
The crime isn't being committed between the parties of the RIAA/MPAA and its members, but rather between the RIAA/MPAA and the public.
Are we reading the same article? Because I don't see anything about the National Center for State Courts in the TorrentFreak article linked in the TD post. I see that you mentioned in another thread some pamphlet published by this group, but how is that a relevent defence against the assertion that the Copyright Alliance's material is propoganda?
Not only that, but those who criticize their material saying it is propoganda and plainly wrong in many significant respects are themselves operating with a lack of understanding of the points being presented in the material.
Care to elaborate on what you believe is "plainly wrong" and why rather than just lobbing ambiguous potshots? Otherwise your statement above is the logical equivalent of "oh huh!"
There's a difference between a company who legitimately holds a trademark, but abuses it and a company that holds a trademark for the sole purpose of abusing it. Monster is the former. The latter is a troll.
this would appear to be a fairly clear cut case of rackateering and the feds need to sic 'em up, lil buddy
If the government hasn't gone after patent and copyright trolls, why would they go after trademark trolls? The short answer is that corporations have convinced the government and many people that patents, copyrights, and trademarks are actual property instead of a set of temporary rights which are meant to benefit the general welfare of the public. Yes, the feds should go after these trolls, but they won't.
The argument that they need to change business models is an opinion.
Yes...and? You're surprised that a web site that provides analysis on the subject of technology contains opinions?
Most importantly, they are opinions that don't consider alternate solutions
Who says these "alternate solutions" aren't being considered? Just because they're not enumerated in the post, doesn't mean that they aren't part of the overall argument. Besides, the reason for the decline in DVD sales is irrelevent. I repeat, the reason that the movie studies need to change their business model doesn't have to do with a short term decline in DVD sales. It has to do with this new fangled contraption called "The Internet" and how it will make the sale of plastic discs irrelevent.
This is actually more what Masnick's law really is: If you state an opinion over and over and link to as many similar opinions, you can treat them as facts in the future.
Feel free to provide a well-reasoned counteropinion rather than a ambiguous attack on the concept of the opinion.
Umm, who are they going to lose the sales to? It isn't like two studios made the same movie.
Why, illegal downloads of course. You can lose sales to illegal sources as well as legal.
It's a big jump from here to saying the studios need to change their business model completely.
The idea that DVD sales are slipping is ancillary to the argument that the movie studios need to change their business model. What's clear from Carlo's post -- and a common theme of many TD posts -- is that the movie studios are having a hard time adapting to a new marketplace. Rather than controlling what replaces DVDs, they're so fearful of "losing" profit, even to themselves, that they're going to end up losing much more in the long run.
On the post: Today, It's Good Manners Being Killed By Texting
Re: Re: Re: Lame
OK, so you first say that commenting on table manners in public is uncommon and then immediately reference Miss Manners, one of the most well-known examples of how table manners are discussed in public. Do you even read your comments before posting them?
On the post: Today, It's Good Manners Being Killed By Texting
Re: Lame
You make it sound like it's wrong to comment on anything unless is has a direct effect on you. This is absurd in this case and it's absurd when people use the same lame logic to fault Techdirt for suggesting ways that the music or movie industry can improve their business models because Techdirt isn't in those businesses.
As for the actual topic of texting while at the dinner, what's wrong with commenting on this? Is it any more rude if someone is reading a comic book or playing a handheld game? No, but it's the same principle applied to modern technology.
If it was wrong or uninteresting to read about the same themes in the context of new situations made possible by technology, then no one would read Techdirt.
On the post: Dutch Music Collection Society Loses Artist Royalties In The Stock Market
Re: Why
The crime isn't being committed between the parties of the RIAA/MPAA and its members, but rather between the RIAA/MPAA and the public.
On the post: EFF Launches Copyright Curriculum To Counter RIAA Propaganda Being Handed Out To Schools
Re: Re: Re: Misquote needs fixing
On the post: EFF Launches Copyright Curriculum To Counter RIAA Propaganda Being Handed Out To Schools
Re:
Care to elaborate on what you believe is "plainly wrong" and why rather than just lobbing ambiguous potshots? Otherwise your statement above is the logical equivalent of "oh huh!"
On the post: We've Had Patent Trolls And Copyright Trolls... So Why Not Trademark Trolls?
Re: Uh, yeah we do
On the post: We've Had Patent Trolls And Copyright Trolls... So Why Not Trademark Trolls?
Re: Son of a bitch
If the government hasn't gone after patent and copyright trolls, why would they go after trademark trolls? The short answer is that corporations have convinced the government and many people that patents, copyrights, and trademarks are actual property instead of a set of temporary rights which are meant to benefit the general welfare of the public. Yes, the feds should go after these trolls, but they won't.
On the post: Film Studios Can 'Cannibalize' Their DVD Sales, Or Lose Them Completely
Re: and um...
On the post: Film Studios Can 'Cannibalize' Their DVD Sales, Or Lose Them Completely
Re: Re: Re:
Yes...and? You're surprised that a web site that provides analysis on the subject of technology contains opinions?
Most importantly, they are opinions that don't consider alternate solutions
Who says these "alternate solutions" aren't being considered? Just because they're not enumerated in the post, doesn't mean that they aren't part of the overall argument. Besides, the reason for the decline in DVD sales is irrelevent. I repeat, the reason that the movie studies need to change their business model doesn't have to do with a short term decline in DVD sales. It has to do with this new fangled contraption called "The Internet" and how it will make the sale of plastic discs irrelevent.
This is actually more what Masnick's law really is: If you state an opinion over and over and link to as many similar opinions, you can treat them as facts in the future.
Feel free to provide a well-reasoned counteropinion rather than a ambiguous attack on the concept of the opinion.
On the post: Film Studios Can 'Cannibalize' Their DVD Sales, Or Lose Them Completely
Re: Re: Re:
What exactly are you saying is incorrect? You replied to my comment, but you seem to be agreeing with it, not contradicting it.
On the post: Film Studios Can 'Cannibalize' Their DVD Sales, Or Lose Them Completely
Re:
Why, illegal downloads of course. You can lose sales to illegal sources as well as legal.
It's a big jump from here to saying the studios need to change their business model completely.
The idea that DVD sales are slipping is ancillary to the argument that the movie studios need to change their business model. What's clear from Carlo's post -- and a common theme of many TD posts -- is that the movie studios are having a hard time adapting to a new marketplace. Rather than controlling what replaces DVDs, they're so fearful of "losing" profit, even to themselves, that they're going to end up losing much more in the long run.
Next >>