Hmm, I didn't know that. I wonder if the fact that they are genuinely offering a product -- a mobile game that, in theory at least, has value on its own -- makes it more acceptable than just selling a raffle ticket that is only worth something if you win. I guess we'll see...
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "is intellectual property immoral?" -- Techdirt answers that only one way:
Perhaps the best thing for you to do would be make a point, instead of harping on this totally irrelevant detail. Honestly, how sensitive and weak are you that you can't get over the word "moron"? Or are you just out of other arguments?
Re: Re: Re: "is intellectual property immoral?" -- Techdirt answers that only one way:
Not seen how resort to name calling advances your rebuttal. If anything it makes you look defensive and petty.
No, it makes me look exhausted and frustrated. Which is exactly the effect Blue there has on everyone in these comments.
Personally, I don't care much when people involve name-calling in their debate. I do, however, think it's pretty telling when someone tries to focus on that as the way to invalidate someone's argument: it just goes to show that you don't have any real argument of your own, and are hoping that you can use the "hey you called him a name!" cheat code to get out of responding or looking moronic yourself.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "is intellectual property immoral?" -- Techdirt answers that only one way:
You're the one choosing to frame it as laziness. The people creating things are just following their creative instinct. Creativity is not about sweat of the brow: many beautiful, meaningful, original things have been "easy" to make if you measure it that way.
ALL creativity is based on things that were created before. Sometimes more directly and overtly than others, that's all. And there's nothing wrong with that, or less valuable about it. Why should there be? I'd be interested to know if you can make an actual case for why derivative work is worthless, rather than just brushing it off as "fantasy fan films" as though everyone will agree that such things are, without exception, bad art.
Nobody is claiming that's true for every person in every city.
It is currently true for many people in many cities. And there are a number of clear trends and growing services that suggest it's going to rapidly become true for even more people in even more cities. Perhaps even eventually most people in most cities.
Umm, you do realize that New York City, San Fransisco and Chicago are not the only cities in the world , right? How about San Antonio, the seventh most populated city in the U.S. and where the referenced McDonald's is located?
Well personally I was thinking of Toronto, where I live. But go ahead and make all the assumptions you want. You're the one who started out by making the utterly, obviously absurd assumption that not having a car means being homeless.
(And I dunno about your local McDonald's or what "someone told you", but in my city at least, the majority of McDonald's employees could never hope to afford a car, unless they are teenagers getting help from mom and dad)
If you listened to the podcast, you'd know that we are primarily talking about city-dwellers. If you live in a city, it is far more expensive to own a car. The privileged are those who can afford not just the car and gas and insurance but the high parking prices and the constant, unavoidable tickets; the average person takes transit or walks to work.
Tell me, honestly: have you listened to the podcast?
If not, I suggest you do that before dismissing the entire idea. There's a half-hour of detailed discussion there, and your attempt to brush it all off with a youtube clip just makes you look simple.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: More FUN from Techdirt's side pages: "As a general policy"!
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Funniest of Week is what did NOT appear: Apple and Spotify focus on getting freeloaders to pay!
On the post: Awesome Stuff: New Digital Instruments Done Right
Re: Careful there
On the post: Awesome Stuff: New Digital Instruments Done Right
Re: Careful there
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: June 7th - 13th
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "is intellectual property immoral?" -- Techdirt answers that only one way:
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: June 7th - 13th
Re: Re: Re: "is intellectual property immoral?" -- Techdirt answers that only one way:
No, it makes me look exhausted and frustrated. Which is exactly the effect Blue there has on everyone in these comments.
Personally, I don't care much when people involve name-calling in their debate. I do, however, think it's pretty telling when someone tries to focus on that as the way to invalidate someone's argument: it just goes to show that you don't have any real argument of your own, and are hoping that you can use the "hey you called him a name!" cheat code to get out of responding or looking moronic yourself.
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: June 7th - 13th
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "is intellectual property immoral?" -- Techdirt answers that only one way:
ALL creativity is based on things that were created before. Sometimes more directly and overtly than others, that's all. And there's nothing wrong with that, or less valuable about it. Why should there be? I'd be interested to know if you can make an actual case for why derivative work is worthless, rather than just brushing it off as "fantasy fan films" as though everyone will agree that such things are, without exception, bad art.
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: June 7th - 13th
Re: Re: Re: "is intellectual property immoral?" -- Techdirt answers that only one way:
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: June 7th - 13th
Re: "is intellectual property immoral?" -- Techdirt answers that only one way:
If you think that 100 years of something is proof that it's the only way things can be, you are a moron. But, we already knew that.
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 28: Is Car Ownership On The Way Out?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I hope so
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 28: Is Car Ownership On The Way Out?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I hope so
It is currently true for many people in many cities. And there are a number of clear trends and growing services that suggest it's going to rapidly become true for even more people in even more cities. Perhaps even eventually most people in most cities.
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 28: Is Car Ownership On The Way Out?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I hope so
Well personally I was thinking of Toronto, where I live. But go ahead and make all the assumptions you want. You're the one who started out by making the utterly, obviously absurd assumption that not having a car means being homeless.
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 28: Is Car Ownership On The Way Out?
Re: Re: Re: Re: I hope so
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 28: Is Car Ownership On The Way Out?
Re: Re: Re: Re: I hope so
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 28: Is Car Ownership On The Way Out?
Re: No
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 28: Is Car Ownership On The Way Out?
Re: Re: Re: Is Car Ownership On The Way Out?
If not, I suggest you do that before dismissing the entire idea. There's a half-hour of detailed discussion there, and your attempt to brush it all off with a youtube clip just makes you look simple.
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 28: Is Car Ownership On The Way Out?
Re: Is Car Ownership On The Way Out?
/your argument
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 28: Is Car Ownership On The Way Out?
Re: Re: I hope so
I can assure you, there are lots of non-homeless people who don't own cars... At least a dozen. Or, y'know, millions.
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 28: Is Car Ownership On The Way Out?
Re:
On the post: WikiLeaks Wants To Crowdsource $100K Reward For Leak Of TPP Text, As Doubts Grow About Agreement's Value
Re: Re: Re: Not sure what all the hubbub is about...
The most irresponsible thing you can do in a democracy is believe that involvement in the political process starts and ends with voting.
Next >>