Apparently in the land of the free and the home of the brave, it's considered a crime to express a negative opinion about anybody or anything.
It's written that way in the Bill of Rights, isn't it? That free speech shall not be abridged unless somebody's feelings might possibly get hurt?
Reminds me of this incident. Sometimes the people should check their assumptions before casting blame and threatening legal action. And frankly, the school should be better at promoting the students' rights instead of panicking any time a public figure (or his staff) starts huffing and puffing.
If you make something available in Europe but refuse to release it in the US for six months, and try to place barriers against the USians buying the item legitimately in the meantime, don't be surprised if they find ways around your barriers. If there are no legitimate ways they'll use illegitimate ways. (Substitute any two regions you like.) Locking out a group of customers and then complaining that they're not buying from you is a bit disingenuous.
If you sell an item in American for $1000 (plus sales tax) and in the UK for £1000 (plus VAT), and then wave your genitals at the Brits when they complain about exchange rates, don't be surprised when they try to find ways to buy the items from US stores. Tell me, do you sell the same item in Japan for ¥1000? Yeah, I didn't think so.
It's ironic that she would tell us to "think analog" when she's guilty of binary thinking herself.
What I find interesting is that when I did the web searches the most prominent answers I found resembled this one, where "binary" or "all-or-nothing" thinking turns out to be a psychological disorder.
And here I was thinking that it was merely a logical fallacy. Silly me.
Re: Re: At least a decade after widespread broadband, YET NO SOLUTION!
And Valve has been losing money hand over fist by making TF2 free. Meantime, nobody can compete with free, so everybody in the world has stopped playing every other video game and has been playing TF2 exclusively.
Re: Nah, Mike, you're brushing aside the problem of infringement,
The solution is most definitely a better business model.
And just because you've stood with your fingers in your ears shouting "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" every time Mike offers examples of better business models doesn't mean he hasn't offered up one or two. In fact, I'm surprised you can hear anything at all.
Your reading comprehension appears remarkably selective.
P.S. The solution? A better business model. No, seriously. You've got the wrong end of this stick.
Re: Re: oh Cisco the White Knight coming to save the day, BS
Nope. I just posted a few links farther down. It was about a competitor suing Cisco for monopolistic practices, and it just happened to be run by a former employee. But a quick scan of several of the reports doesn't actually show that they were beating up on him BECAUSE he was a former employee. They were just trying to protect a lock-in business strategy.
For the record, however, while this is Cisco being asshats, this isn't an issue of employee relations. They're being asshats to a competitor who sued them, and they're trying to hold on to a lock-in business strategy.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Because you have a weird definition of "the public"
Yesterday, Mike lionized Mac Miller for SELLING 150,000 copies of his album. The reason the LITTLE guy was able to do this was because of copyright.
It was? That's funny. I thought it was hard work, dedication, and a good business strategy. Now you're saying that copyright did all of that!
OK, sarcasm aside, I think I know what you're trying to say: copyright enabled that by protecting his work so it wouldn't get stolen.
Prove it. Seriously. If you're going to make assertions like that you need to come up with more than "it worked and copyright laws were in effect therefore it's copyright that let it work." How much did copyright protect him? How many sales would he have lost had copyright not prevented copying? How many people did he take to court over copyright violations?
If you're suggesting that copyright kept people from making unauthorized copies and only because of that was he permitted to succeed, then why doesn't it work for the RIAA? You're trying to claim on one hand that current copyright law is good enough to protect an independent musician with limited resources, and not only allow him to make a living but to excel, but it does not protect an industry with enormous resources from being totally shut down?
Is there an inconsistency somewhere in your argument?
I realize that to make my point I've put some words into your mouth, and so I am in grave danger of having made a strawman argument. If I've done that, I apologize, it was not my intention; rather I was trying to clarify what I thought you meant. Please, if that is not what what you intended to say, by all means tell me what words you meant.
Because it sure looks to me like you're saying that the present copyright laws are plenty strong enough, therefore they need to be stronger because they're not strong enough.
On the post: Press Realizing That ICE May Be Breaking The Law Showing NBC Universal Propaganda Films On Domains It Seized
Re:
On the post: Press Realizing That ICE May Be Breaking The Law Showing NBC Universal Propaganda Films On Domains It Seized
On the post: Ubuntu's Self-Appointed Benevolent Dictator For Life: 'Whole Patent System Is A Sham'
That's what I said! And I usually point to James Burke's excellent series Connections for a big pile of examples.
I also think this remark from The Ascent of Man is relevant.
On the post: Another DNS Provider Comes Out Against SOPA
On the post: Kansas Governor Apologizes After Staff Gets High School Student In Trouble For Tweet About The Governor
It's written that way in the Bill of Rights, isn't it? That free speech shall not be abridged unless somebody's feelings might possibly get hurt?
Reminds me of this incident. Sometimes the people should check their assumptions before casting blame and threatening legal action. And frankly, the school should be better at promoting the students' rights instead of panicking any time a public figure (or his staff) starts huffing and puffing.
On the post: Ex-RIAA Boss Ignores All Criticisim Of SOPA/PIPA, Claims Any Complaints Are Trying To Justify Stealing
Re:
If you sell an item in American for $1000 (plus sales tax) and in the UK for £1000 (plus VAT), and then wave your genitals at the Brits when they complain about exchange rates, don't be surprised when they try to find ways to buy the items from US stores. Tell me, do you sell the same item in Japan for ¥1000? Yeah, I didn't think so.
On the post: Ex-RIAA Boss Ignores All Criticisim Of SOPA/PIPA, Claims Any Complaints Are Trying To Justify Stealing
What I find interesting is that when I did the web searches the most prominent answers I found resembled this one, where "binary" or "all-or-nothing" thinking turns out to be a psychological disorder.
And here I was thinking that it was merely a logical fallacy. Silly me.
On the post: Ex-RIAA Boss Ignores All Criticisim Of SOPA/PIPA, Claims Any Complaints Are Trying To Justify Stealing
Re: Re: At least a decade after widespread broadband, YET NO SOLUTION!
On the post: Ex-RIAA Boss Ignores All Criticisim Of SOPA/PIPA, Claims Any Complaints Are Trying To Justify Stealing
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: At least a decade after widespread broadband, YET NO SOLUTION!
On the post: Ex-RIAA Boss Ignores All Criticisim Of SOPA/PIPA, Claims Any Complaints Are Trying To Justify Stealing
Re: Nah, Mike, you're brushing aside the problem of infringement,
And just because you've stood with your fingers in your ears shouting "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" every time Mike offers examples of better business models doesn't mean he hasn't offered up one or two. In fact, I'm surprised you can hear anything at all.
Your reading comprehension appears remarkably selective.
P.S. The solution? A better business model. No, seriously. You've got the wrong end of this stick.
On the post: European Court Of Justice Says ISPs Cannot Be Forced To Be Copyright Cops
It's easy.
Just block all communication.
Will some legal communication get caught in the net? Sure, but hey, you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.
It's all about Pyrrhic victory. And if you freetards can't see that, well, tough beans.
On the post: Cisco Calls Out HP For Suing Former Employees Who Leave HP To Work For Cisco
Re: Re: oh Cisco the White Knight coming to save the day, BS
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111123/04093516885/cisco-calls-out-hp-suing-former-e mployees-who-leave-hp-to-work-cisco.shtml#c150
On the post: Cisco Calls Out HP For Suing Former Employees Who Leave HP To Work For Cisco
Re: oh Cisco the White Knight coming to save the day, BS
http:/ /abovethelaw.com/2011/07/sue-a-giant-corporation-get-rewarded-with-audacious-criminal-charges/#more- 84911
http://channelnomics.com/2011/08/08/prosecution-peter-alfred-adekeye/
For the record, however, while this is Cisco being asshats, this isn't an issue of employee relations. They're being asshats to a competitor who sued them, and they're trying to hold on to a lock-in business strategy.
On the post: The Definitive Post On Why SOPA And Protect IP Are Bad, Bad Ideas
On the post: Microsoft's Cold Feet Over SOPA Behind BSA's 'Rethinking' Its Views
Re:
On the post: Why The Public Is Willing To Rally Against SOPA/PIPA, But Not For It
Re: Re: Re: Re: Because you have a weird definition of "the public"
It was? That's funny. I thought it was hard work, dedication, and a good business strategy. Now you're saying that copyright did all of that!
OK, sarcasm aside, I think I know what you're trying to say: copyright enabled that by protecting his work so it wouldn't get stolen.
Prove it. Seriously. If you're going to make assertions like that you need to come up with more than "it worked and copyright laws were in effect therefore it's copyright that let it work." How much did copyright protect him? How many sales would he have lost had copyright not prevented copying? How many people did he take to court over copyright violations?
If you're suggesting that copyright kept people from making unauthorized copies and only because of that was he permitted to succeed, then why doesn't it work for the RIAA? You're trying to claim on one hand that current copyright law is good enough to protect an independent musician with limited resources, and not only allow him to make a living but to excel, but it does not protect an industry with enormous resources from being totally shut down?
Is there an inconsistency somewhere in your argument?
I realize that to make my point I've put some words into your mouth, and so I am in grave danger of having made a strawman argument. If I've done that, I apologize, it was not my intention; rather I was trying to clarify what I thought you meant. Please, if that is not what what you intended to say, by all means tell me what words you meant.
Because it sure looks to me like you're saying that the present copyright laws are plenty strong enough, therefore they need to be stronger because they're not strong enough.
On the post: The Scale Of Money
It's all about perspective.
Thinking about the posters myself... I'm just not sure what wall to put them on.
On the post: RIAA Thinking Of Backing Righthaven
Re:
On the post: RIAA Thinking Of Backing Righthaven
On the post: Microsoft 'Anti-Piracy' Campaign Explains Why It's Bad For Businesses To Pay For Microsoft Software
Re: Re: They're past the "loss leader" stage, everyone is "addicted".
Next >>