The people using those terms are attempting to create a VERY negative image of a situation.
The "microsoft tax" that you reference on wikipedia is cited from two blogs, and the postings seem very negative towards Microsoft. Could they just be trying to create a negative image?
The other items you cite again are attempting to create negative images by using a nasty word "tax". In the case of the poverty tax, they are doing what is often the case in the US these days, attempting to blame others rather than addressing the underlying issues.
In all cases, the term "tax" is used to create a negative image of a situation.
Following the logic of this article, example, we would have an Xbox360 tax, a PSP tax, a Wii Tax, a VHS tax, a Beta Tax, a Bluray tax, and so on. Any system that has it's own format or tools is, by this standard, a tax regime. This is not the case.
We are in very early days of the ebook world. Just like the days of beta and vhs, we are still dealing with competing formats and systems, different processes, and various companies and groups attempting to find a balance between the desires of the consumers, the desires of the producers, and the rights of each. To stand today and damn any system that attempts to do this as a tax is a failure, similar to damning your 6 year old because his calculus sucks.
the 1%ers is a concept that says that 98% of the people are in the grey. It's only the extremely noisy 1% at either end of the issue that make the majority of the noise. When you open up the floor to discussion (even on this website) you are more likely to get 1%ers rather than average people, because average people don't have an extreme enough opinion to argue for it with any true passion.
1%ers love strawberry Quik, or hate strawberry Quik. Everyone else is somewhere in between. Those who love or hate it will tell you so with a passion. Everyone else who sort of likes it or can live without it won't have the passion to express their quik-feelings.
As for the icon, well, I figured the name needed an appropriate logo, it makes it harder for that one schoolkid to keep trying to put words in my mouth.
1. They are not songwriters as a profession, rather songwriting is something they do for free to have material to play live. Without the live aspect, they couldn't afford to be songwriters.
2. Singwriters like Isaac Hayes wouldn't exist in a "get out there and play" system, as their strength isn't in performing, but in writing.
3. If there is no system in place to reward songwriters, they would have to charge significant fees up front to write songs. The current system is functional because the songwriter, performer, and others are joined together in a common goal to put out music people love. It is a "common good" system. When songwriters are paid piecework style for their work, the system becomes more adversarial, where songwriters and performers have different goals (and it isn't all focused on the fans).
4. Pure songwriters are the quiet and unsung heroes of the music business, and just like the top performers, the top songwriters make out very well. Songwriting is often a more reliable source of long term income, as royalties come in for a long time. Most performers cannot afford to pay up front what royalties would pay in the long run. Further, as I mentioned before, the royalty system joins songwriters, artists, producers, and management in a common goal that results in a positive product.
The current system tends to work well because everyone has a common goal. When you suggest to give music away and to make other changes to the structure, you have to look at how that would change the motivations and rewards systems for each player in the chain. If their goal stops being "making the music that people want to hear / enjoy / buy", then you end with an adversarial rather than "common good" system.
Mike, your answer is a nice pat answer, but it is a typical attempt to misrepresent reality. Select a single type of unexplained data, and hang your hat on it.
"In fact, according to Mark Rask, author of 1999’s American Autobahn, the average speed for cars is 130 km/h (81 mph); at any given moment, 15 percent are traveling 155 km/h (96 mph) or faster."
Add to that:
"About one quarter of the total length of the German autobahn network has no speed limit, about one quarter has a permanent limit, and the remaining parts have a temporary limit for a number of reasons."
The speed limit? 130km/h
So, now only 25% of the road has a limit over 130km/h, and 15% of all of the traffic is going 155km/h or faster. Assuming compliance with the speed limits, that would mean in the unlimited section, 15/25 of the cars are going over 155, or 60%!
See, when you don't look at the numbers, your pat answer looks good. Dig a little deeper, and suddenly your pat answer looks both smug and uninformed.
DECE or something similar is likely what the future holds. It is the sort of system that balances artists rights and consumers rights, giving the consumer pretty much all of their fair use rights, while giving the artists / rights holders the confidence that their products are more difficult to share without permission.
The true completion of this sort of a system will be when resale rights are handled correctly, such that content and devices could be resold without the risks of content migrating without permission.
I cannot see which of the blessed fair use rights would be missing under such a system.
Oh Mike, your forgot "DRM tax" and "Bono sucks" in this thread.
Actually, they get no "carte blanche" as each person has to be checked etc. It isn't like they just let anyone in the door. Just as importantly, the industry people actually have a financial stake in the situation. Consumers are at the other end of the deal, either paying for or not paying for products, which is their method of approving or disapproving of the system.
Would you let all consumers in? How about 1 person from each consumer group in the country? Would you allow new groups, or only established groups? Would you allow individual consumers who don't feel they are represented also be part of the process?
Too much freedom and too much openness is about as bad as too much communism.
The only thing preventing you from using an existing DVR to record "everything all the time forever" right now is limits in storage technology.
No, the only thing stopping me from doing that is having the ability to watch all of the digital channels at the same time all the time.
In the end, I think that if the copy is outside of your hands, and could potentially be used by others, then it isn't fair use in any way shape or form. It's just glorified file sharing at worst, and at best "video on demand" service that doesn't pay royalties for it's product.
I said that this piece of "journalism" is pure speculation, and that even Mike admits that there is no causal connection between the leak and better sales. That other movies of the same type sold better might suggestion the opposite.
Mike, in the end, it is about allowing everyone a voice. But in giving everyone a voice, you don't usually hear all the voices, you hear the 1%ers, and not much else.
For those who complain about ACTA, example, consider the groups that want to represent the consumer. Do they truly represent all the consumers, or only a narrow group who wants something specific opposed to what the ACTA agreement will likely feature?
Do we invite the public in to discuss peace treaties? Nuclear arms agreements?
Mass ticketing has stopped speeding. Without any speed limits or any enforcement, people would all drive well over 100MPH on the interstate, doing what they please.
You have to think what would be without it, what it is with it, and you can then see the effects.
none of this shows for certain that the Wolverine leak helped at the box office
Which means this is a truly big piece of speculation, with nothing to back it up. The same data could be used to show that Wolverine would have in fact opened even bigger if people hadn't already seen the movie.
Participatory government is a fantasy, seemingly only working when it comes to having a hotline (or app) to report pot holes and burnt out light bulbs. The Presidency isn't something that works well with 230 million back seat drivers.
Obama has found out, like pretty much everyone who went before him, that they just don't have the time or the desire to put everything they do up to a long and pointless debate. They also don't want to turn every move into a shouting match, there the 1%ers at each end dominate the discussion and leave everyone else out.
On the post: Will France's Three Strikes Law Matter?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You got it wrong, I showed you the numbers, and yet, well, there you go. Rather than going "maybe I over did it" you are just trying to put me down.
Nothing new in 2010?
On the post: Is Hiding A New DRM Standard Behind The Guise Of 'It Works On Any Device' Really That Compelling?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: old media
On the post: Is Hiding A New DRM Standard Behind The Guise Of 'It Works On Any Device' Really That Compelling?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What is the Solution?
It also suggests that a course of lithium might be in order.
On the post: Despite Awful Customer Service, Woman Felt Forced To Buy Another Sony eBook Reader... Thanks To DRM
Re: Explanation of X-Tax
The people using those terms are attempting to create a VERY negative image of a situation.
The "microsoft tax" that you reference on wikipedia is cited from two blogs, and the postings seem very negative towards Microsoft. Could they just be trying to create a negative image?
The other items you cite again are attempting to create negative images by using a nasty word "tax". In the case of the poverty tax, they are doing what is often the case in the US these days, attempting to blame others rather than addressing the underlying issues.
In all cases, the term "tax" is used to create a negative image of a situation.
Following the logic of this article, example, we would have an Xbox360 tax, a PSP tax, a Wii Tax, a VHS tax, a Beta Tax, a Bluray tax, and so on. Any system that has it's own format or tools is, by this standard, a tax regime. This is not the case.
We are in very early days of the ebook world. Just like the days of beta and vhs, we are still dealing with competing formats and systems, different processes, and various companies and groups attempting to find a balance between the desires of the consumers, the desires of the producers, and the rights of each. To stand today and damn any system that attempts to do this as a tax is a failure, similar to damning your 6 year old because his calculus sucks.
On the post: Is Hiding A New DRM Standard Behind The Guise Of 'It Works On Any Device' Really That Compelling?
Re: Re: Re: old media
On the post: Still Waiting For The First Real Particpatory Presidential Administration
Re: Re: Not going to happen
the 1%ers is a concept that says that 98% of the people are in the grey. It's only the extremely noisy 1% at either end of the issue that make the majority of the noise. When you open up the floor to discussion (even on this website) you are more likely to get 1%ers rather than average people, because average people don't have an extreme enough opinion to argue for it with any true passion.
1%ers love strawberry Quik, or hate strawberry Quik. Everyone else is somewhere in between. Those who love or hate it will tell you so with a passion. Everyone else who sort of likes it or can live without it won't have the passion to express their quik-feelings.
As for the icon, well, I figured the name needed an appropriate logo, it makes it harder for that one schoolkid to keep trying to put words in my mouth.
On the post: Is Hiding A New DRM Standard Behind The Guise Of 'It Works On Any Device' Really That Compelling?
Re: old media
If you can use your content on any device...
if you can resell your content....
what is missing?
(by the way, there is this "reply to this comment" thing at the bottom of posts, which helps keep your comments in thread)
On the post: Bono: We Should Use China's Censorship As An Example Of How To Stop Piracy
Re: Re:
2. Singwriters like Isaac Hayes wouldn't exist in a "get out there and play" system, as their strength isn't in performing, but in writing.
3. If there is no system in place to reward songwriters, they would have to charge significant fees up front to write songs. The current system is functional because the songwriter, performer, and others are joined together in a common goal to put out music people love. It is a "common good" system. When songwriters are paid piecework style for their work, the system becomes more adversarial, where songwriters and performers have different goals (and it isn't all focused on the fans).
4. Pure songwriters are the quiet and unsung heroes of the music business, and just like the top performers, the top songwriters make out very well. Songwriting is often a more reliable source of long term income, as royalties come in for a long time. Most performers cannot afford to pay up front what royalties would pay in the long run. Further, as I mentioned before, the royalty system joins songwriters, artists, producers, and management in a common goal that results in a positive product.
The current system tends to work well because everyone has a common goal. When you suggest to give music away and to make other changes to the structure, you have to look at how that would change the motivations and rewards systems for each player in the chain. If their goal stops being "making the music that people want to hear / enjoy / buy", then you end with an adversarial rather than "common good" system.
On the post: Will France's Three Strikes Law Matter?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"In fact, according to Mark Rask, author of 1999’s American Autobahn, the average speed for cars is 130 km/h (81 mph); at any given moment, 15 percent are traveling 155 km/h (96 mph) or faster."
Add to that:
"About one quarter of the total length of the German autobahn network has no speed limit, about one quarter has a permanent limit, and the remaining parts have a temporary limit for a number of reasons."
The speed limit? 130km/h
So, now only 25% of the road has a limit over 130km/h, and 15% of all of the traffic is going 155km/h or faster. Assuming compliance with the speed limits, that would mean in the unlimited section, 15/25 of the cars are going over 155, or 60%!
See, when you don't look at the numbers, your pat answer looks good. Dig a little deeper, and suddenly your pat answer looks both smug and uninformed.
Carry on.
On the post: Is Hiding A New DRM Standard Behind The Guise Of 'It Works On Any Device' Really That Compelling?
The true completion of this sort of a system will be when resale rights are handled correctly, such that content and devices could be resold without the risks of content migrating without permission.
I cannot see which of the blessed fair use rights would be missing under such a system.
Oh Mike, your forgot "DRM tax" and "Bono sucks" in this thread.
On the post: Still Waiting For The First Real Particpatory Presidential Administration
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not going to happen
Would you let all consumers in? How about 1 person from each consumer group in the country? Would you allow new groups, or only established groups? Would you allow individual consumers who don't feel they are represented also be part of the process?
Too much freedom and too much openness is about as bad as too much communism.
On the post: How China's Attempts To Censor The Internet Are Failing
On the post: Singapore Court Rules That Online DVR Is Infringing... While Noting How Copyright Law Isn't Really Set Up For This
Re: Re:
No, the only thing stopping me from doing that is having the ability to watch all of the digital channels at the same time all the time.
In the end, I think that if the copy is outside of your hands, and could potentially be used by others, then it isn't fair use in any way shape or form. It's just glorified file sharing at worst, and at best "video on demand" service that doesn't pay royalties for it's product.
On the post: Will France's Three Strikes Law Matter?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
No, the idea is that the vast majority of people don't drive at 100. That's the point. You cannot fix EVERYTHING.
troll on. Does your mommy know you are on the internet instead of doing your school work?
On the post: Could Wolverine's Leaking Have Helped It At The Box Office?
Re: Re:
I said that this piece of "journalism" is pure speculation, and that even Mike admits that there is no causal connection between the leak and better sales. That other movies of the same type sold better might suggestion the opposite.
On the post: Still Waiting For The First Real Particpatory Presidential Administration
Re: Re: Not going to happen
For those who complain about ACTA, example, consider the groups that want to represent the consumer. Do they truly represent all the consumers, or only a narrow group who wants something specific opposed to what the ACTA agreement will likely feature?
Do we invite the public in to discuss peace treaties? Nuclear arms agreements?
Where do you draw the participation line?
On the post: Will France's Three Strikes Law Matter?
Re: Re:
Mass ticketing has stopped speeding. Without any speed limits or any enforcement, people would all drive well over 100MPH on the interstate, doing what they please.
You have to think what would be without it, what it is with it, and you can then see the effects.
On the post: Could Wolverine's Leaking Have Helped It At The Box Office?
Which means this is a truly big piece of speculation, with nothing to back it up. The same data could be used to show that Wolverine would have in fact opened even bigger if people hadn't already seen the movie.
On the post: Still Waiting For The First Real Particpatory Presidential Administration
Not going to happen
Obama has found out, like pretty much everyone who went before him, that they just don't have the time or the desire to put everything they do up to a long and pointless debate. They also don't want to turn every move into a shouting match, there the 1%ers at each end dominate the discussion and leave everyone else out.
It's a nice idea, but completely non-functional.
On the post: Will France's Three Strikes Law Matter?
I will use this answer the next time I get a speeding ticket.
Next >>