"Just like authors who write books and musicians who write songs that will be enjoyed for generations to come, those who improve property are also engaged in the creative process"
Implicit in that statement are these questions:
Why should only artists and inventors get government granted monopolies? Why can't we all get them?
I'm glad this issue is coming up because by asking "why" some entities get government granted monopolies, we can start asking whether they should get them. Maybe this utterly ridiculous situation will start that dialog.
Apparently Mrs. Schultz has never heard of a couple of journalists named Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. They broke a minor story back in the 70s. They brought a president down and changed journalism. All with an anonymous informant.
They must not be teaching these historical trivialities where Schultz obtained her degree.
...there may only be a handful of people in the world qualified to actually make a judgment on whether a development is sufficiently innovative so as to justify a patent. None of those people, presumably, will be employed by the patent office.
I'm not saying I agree with it. But for right now it sort of makes sense to me. I just put the question out there to get contrary opinions on it. Thanks for your input.
Who says Sony has a duty to continuing building and selling stuff you want to buy? There are plenty of things in my life I can no longer replace. That's a fact of life.
"Do Sony want folks to be able to learn how to use their kit or not?"
I cannot answer for Sony nor do I care about your question as it does not affect my life at all.
When I bought my PS3 it could not simultaneously run audio out of the optical and the HDMI output at the same time. Sony gave me a free update and now it can. In the old days I would have had to have bought an entirely new PS3. But I got the feature I wanted for free.
Do you want to live in a world where you have to buy new hardware every year to get the latest features? Or is it worth getting those features for free even if you occasionally lose unpopular features?
God, there is an upside. Free new features and updates. When I bought my PS3 it could not simultaneously run audio out of the optical and the HDMI output at the same time. Sony gave me a free update and now it can. In the old days I would have had to have bought an entirely new PS3. But I got the feature I wanted for free.
So, once again, is this great upside worth the occasional downside of losing a feature not many people used?
I guess I'll repeat my question for you. Sony gives us new features and updates for free. It does not have to do that, but it does.
Is it worth it to get those free updated features if sometimes unpopular features are removed?
If your argument is that Sony should never change the PS3, then Sony would never update it. If a new feature came out, you'd have to buy an entirely different PS3. Is that what you want?
I guess I'll repeat my question for you. Sony gives us new features and updates for free. It does not have to do that, but it does.
Is it worth it to get those free updated features if sometimes unpopular features are removed?
If your argument is that Sony should never change the PS3, then Sony would never update it. If a new feature came out, you'd have to buy an entirely different PS3. Is that what you want?
On the post: Hollywood Threatens To Stop Selling DVDs In Spain In A Push To Increase Unauthorized File Sharing?
On the post: Turns Out Not Everyone Drives Worse While Talking On A Phone (But You Probably Do)
Re: Re:
On the post: Developers Trying To Treat Houses Like Copyright; Want A Cut Of Every Future Resale
Implicit in that statement are these questions:
I'm glad this issue is coming up because by asking "why" some entities get government granted monopolies, we can start asking whether they should get them. Maybe this utterly ridiculous situation will start that dialog.
On the post: Software Patents Violate The Patent Bargain, Since There Is No Disclosure To Trade-Off
On the post: Turns Out Not Everyone Drives Worse While Talking On A Phone (But You Probably Do)
What scientists call the Dr. Johnny Fever Effect.
On the post: Columnist Claims Anonymity Is Bad For Our Country
Re: Re:
On the post: Columnist Claims Anonymity Is Bad For Our Country
They must not be teaching these historical trivialities where Schultz obtained her degree.
On the post: Inventor Claims He Got Patent 20 Years After Filing... But Details Missing
Re:
On the post: The Patent System Does Not Scale
On the post: Sony Deletes Feature On PS3's; You Don't Own What You Thought You Bought
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'm not saying I agree with it. But for right now it sort of makes sense to me. I just put the question out there to get contrary opinions on it. Thanks for your input.
On the post: Sony Deletes Feature On PS3's; You Don't Own What You Thought You Bought
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Who says Sony has a duty to continuing building and selling stuff you want to buy? There are plenty of things in my life I can no longer replace. That's a fact of life.
"Do Sony want folks to be able to learn how to use their kit or not?"
I cannot answer for Sony nor do I care about your question as it does not affect my life at all.
On the post: Sony Deletes Feature On PS3's; You Don't Own What You Thought You Bought
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
When I bought my PS3 it could not simultaneously run audio out of the optical and the HDMI output at the same time. Sony gave me a free update and now it can. In the old days I would have had to have bought an entirely new PS3. But I got the feature I wanted for free.
Do you want to live in a world where you have to buy new hardware every year to get the latest features? Or is it worth getting those features for free even if you occasionally lose unpopular features?
On the post: Sony Deletes Feature On PS3's; You Don't Own What You Thought You Bought
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
God, there is an upside. Free new features and updates. When I bought my PS3 it could not simultaneously run audio out of the optical and the HDMI output at the same time. Sony gave me a free update and now it can. In the old days I would have had to have bought an entirely new PS3. But I got the feature I wanted for free.
So, once again, is this great upside worth the occasional downside of losing a feature not many people used?
On the post: Sony Deletes Feature On PS3's; You Don't Own What You Thought You Bought
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Is it worth it to get those free updated features if sometimes unpopular features are removed?
If your argument is that Sony should never change the PS3, then Sony would never update it. If a new feature came out, you'd have to buy an entirely different PS3. Is that what you want?
On the post: Sony Deletes Feature On PS3's; You Don't Own What You Thought You Bought
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Is it worth it to get those free updated features if sometimes unpopular features are removed?
If your argument is that Sony should never change the PS3, then Sony would never update it. If a new feature came out, you'd have to buy an entirely different PS3. Is that what you want?
On the post: Sony Deletes Feature On PS3's; You Don't Own What You Thought You Bought
Re: Re:
But, as I said before, my question still stands.
On the post: Sony Deletes Feature On PS3's; You Don't Own What You Thought You Bought
Re: Re:
On the post: Sony Deletes Feature On PS3's; You Don't Own What You Thought You Bought
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Sony doesn't have to update to add new features either. But you enjoy the fact that it does.
And all those people, corporations, and government entities which bought PS3s to use as cheap computer nodes can continue to use them as such.
On the post: Sony Deletes Feature On PS3's; You Don't Own What You Thought You Bought
Re: Re:
On the post: Sony Deletes Feature On PS3's; You Don't Own What You Thought You Bought
Re: Re: Where's the FTC?
Next >>