Senator Snowe is retiring. With her retirement, she can propose legislation but I highly doubt it will pass.
However, she was facing a Tea Party challenge that would makes her motives for retirement sketchy. Further, being a part of a for profit college scandal should raise eyebrows. What I'm weaning from this is that Snowe is using her position to try to help make profit when she gets out of the position. Odds are when she gets out of office, she might just decide to hold some patents and use them for different teaching methods and she will use the law to continuously enforce this crony capitalist system.
Meanwhile, I have to question why Senator Landrieu is a part of this. Her expertise seems to be healthcare and business. Why not focus on those two issues with Senator Wyden and get some much needed guidance on better systems in place instead of this foolish legislation that does nothing?
where has Amanda said that she does not care about copyright and is surrendering her?
Again, you're missing what I'm saying.
What the argument for the past 30 years has been about is more and more copyright enforcement. Yet, Amanda is finding methods that don't even use copyright enforcement in any way, shape or form. So extended copyright, extended enforcement, extended censorship is not working to make artists money. This is proof from her actions that more copyright has not worked for her, nor has it worked for the RIAA that tries these techniques.
Until the trade industries actually employ better services that customers want instead of the empty fight on piracy, they will continue to lose money and waste time on a non-issue.
For the people that don't get it, I'm going to try to explain this in a somewhat different manner.
Amanda Palmer does not rely on copyright. Period. She relies on an intuitive sense of what works for her and what works for how she'll make money in the future. The Kickstarter is a tool to have people invest in her and her works and she is reestablishing a connection. But people are going to miss one thing.
Out of 30 years of copyright law, why have the major labels never (and I do mean never) done anything in regards to this transparency? Why do they continue in this cloak and dagger world where the only ones allowed to have copyright protection are the ones that have done nothing to deserve it?
Time and time again, we have to settle with the "copyright holders" screwing over artists because they can't think of a world where artists are in control of their money.
Yet when it's pointed out, who are the ones ridiculed? That's right... The artists themselves.
So here is the point for those that would miss it. Your copyright law is outdated.
Give us new technology and no more copyright. Leave it as a push for Progressing the Arts and Sciences instead of censorship. That's all anyone wants. Not the shoddy mercantilism you continue to espouse.
If the entire bill is a problem, then why should any compromise be acceptable?
Mike, small caveat. People have "compromised" on copyright for the last 30 years. We've hit the limit of copyright. We don't need copyright. We don't need acceptable censorship. We've needed the public to have a say in copyright.
Slavery soon turned to Jim Crow which has now lead to a massive incarceration of minorities based on indifference. Human beings persist in being property thanks to making them animals for under minimum wage and taking away all of their rights when they come out of prison.
Our prisons are overflowing with minor drug crimes. And what's even worse, we have allowed private prisons to profit from that labor.
So don't tell me that segregation doesn't exist. It was never eliminated. Thanks to Nixon and Reagan in particular and their "war on crime" it soon became a war on minorities that has had a devastating effect on the politics of the US in a severely negative fashion.
Since the punk, new wave revolution, and ESPECIALLY since the internet, a great many artists, film makers and musicians earn money directly from copyright.
Then why are so many artists revolting against the old copyright regime?
People make and sell their own music.
But they're not going to the labels and keeping their own copyrights. So saying that enforcement equates to they're making money on copyright is disingenuous and obnoxious at best.
It's a comfortable lie that you're only punishing lazy middlemen when you pirate, but many times you are punishing self releasing artists, indie film makers, and one man band record companies.
. We've said for years the pirate sites are profiting from piracy.
And even as you say it, it has made no sense. The pirate sites don't make a lot of money. The people you represent do.
The people who consume the pirated content are of course looking for free content.
Again, nonsense. They click on the TV and they've paid for that content. People can look for free online in the form of Youtube streams. People can look for free in regards to new games that can be found for free. The concept of time shift from the Betamax ruling is not lost on anyone. Yet you ignore this important aspect to consider people thieves when they can find the alternatives at a time and a place that's convenient for them. Why must you continue to ignore actual facts for this moral belief in "But... But... Piracy" routines?
New' compared to radio and tv of course. No one was sharing music on the net 20 years ago. Pretty silly then to claim the phenom is 20 years old. In terms of content delivery, the law and copyright, it's NEW.
Again, this is short sighted and wrong. People are using new mediums of delivery at their convenience. Even if you think it's dead, time shifting is not gone. People can hear songs on the radio or their mp3 player. They can watch Cable TV or use the internet for news. They can play games on PC or find old games. This does not equate to lost money.
It's new monetary avenues. Why aren't you exploring what you can do with these new avenues instead of wasting time fighting things you can't resolve?
The US has lost Thomas Drake, William Binney, and a number of whistleblowers that spoke up as well as instill a $1.7 billion dollar massive spy ring in terms of the NSA Utah project. Honestly, the chances of Michael Daniel coming into this situation and wanting to change the system are very few. The "establishment" has spoken. The ones that speak up and don't go for the scare mongering are going to be the ones that are thrown out. I wouldn't be surprised if eventually Howard Schmidt, like Robert Gates, doesn't start speaking up about how the government is truly corrupted in this regard.
I truly hope I'm wrong, but the signs for Michael Daniel being as moderate as Howard are very slim IMO.
That's asking a lot. You're going to have officers able to testify and willing to lie and do more ground research for a public defender that is already overworked?
On the post: The Idea That Women Need More Patents, Copyrights And Trademarks Shows Up In Newly Proposed Law
Few extra thoughts.
However, she was facing a Tea Party challenge that would makes her motives for retirement sketchy. Further, being a part of a for profit college scandal should raise eyebrows. What I'm weaning from this is that Snowe is using her position to try to help make profit when she gets out of the position. Odds are when she gets out of office, she might just decide to hold some patents and use them for different teaching methods and she will use the law to continuously enforce this crony capitalist system.
Meanwhile, I have to question why Senator Landrieu is a part of this. Her expertise seems to be healthcare and business. Why not focus on those two issues with Senator Wyden and get some much needed guidance on better systems in place instead of this foolish legislation that does nothing?
On the post: Amanda Palmer Details How All That Kickstarter Money Is Being Spent
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point that is summarily missed...
On the post: Did Hollywood Not Use Available DMCA Tools Just To Pretend It Needed SOPA?
Re: Re:
The MPAA merely lobbies for the studios in Congress and represents them as the hated face to the public.
On the post: Congress Proposes Giving Another $10 Million To ICE To Censor More Websites For Hollywood
Just sayin...
On the post: Amanda Palmer Details How All That Kickstarter Money Is Being Spent
Re: Re: The point that is summarily missed...
Again, you're missing what I'm saying.
What the argument for the past 30 years has been about is more and more copyright enforcement. Yet, Amanda is finding methods that don't even use copyright enforcement in any way, shape or form. So extended copyright, extended enforcement, extended censorship is not working to make artists money. This is proof from her actions that more copyright has not worked for her, nor has it worked for the RIAA that tries these techniques.
Until the trade industries actually employ better services that customers want instead of the empty fight on piracy, they will continue to lose money and waste time on a non-issue.
On the post: Amanda Palmer Details How All That Kickstarter Money Is Being Spent
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point that is summarily missed...
On the post: Wyden To Obama: Hollywood Shouldn't Know More About TPP Than Congress
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Amanda Palmer Details How All That Kickstarter Money Is Being Spent
Re: Re: The point that is summarily missed...
On the post: Amanda Palmer Details How All That Kickstarter Money Is Being Spent
Re: Re: The point that is summarily missed...
On the post: Amanda Palmer Details How All That Kickstarter Money Is Being Spent
The point that is summarily missed...
Amanda Palmer does not rely on copyright. Period. She relies on an intuitive sense of what works for her and what works for how she'll make money in the future. The Kickstarter is a tool to have people invest in her and her works and she is reestablishing a connection. But people are going to miss one thing.
Out of 30 years of copyright law, why have the major labels never (and I do mean never) done anything in regards to this transparency? Why do they continue in this cloak and dagger world where the only ones allowed to have copyright protection are the ones that have done nothing to deserve it?
Time and time again, we have to settle with the "copyright holders" screwing over artists because they can't think of a world where artists are in control of their money.
Yet when it's pointed out, who are the ones ridiculed? That's right... The artists themselves.
Their fans are locked up.
Their business partners are charged criminally with no purpose but to destroy their business.
In essence, the criminals are the ones choosing where innovation takes place.
So here is the point for those that would miss it. Your copyright law is outdated.
Give us new technology and no more copyright. Leave it as a push for Progressing the Arts and Sciences instead of censorship. That's all anyone wants. Not the shoddy mercantilism you continue to espouse.
On the post: Congressional Staffers Still Can't Come To Terms With What Happened Over SOPA
Re: Re:
If the entire bill is a problem, then why should any compromise be acceptable?
Mike, small caveat. People have "compromised" on copyright for the last 30 years. We've hit the limit of copyright. We don't need copyright. We don't need acceptable censorship. We've needed the public to have a say in copyright.
On the post: Chelsea Clinton: We Must Protect The Children On The Internet
Re:
On the post: Congressional Staffers Still Can't Come To Terms With What Happened Over SOPA
Re:
On the post: US Gov't Thinks Censorship Is Bad, Unless It's Paid For
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Our prisons are overflowing with minor drug crimes. And what's even worse, we have allowed private prisons to profit from that labor.
So don't tell me that segregation doesn't exist. It was never eliminated. Thanks to Nixon and Reagan in particular and their "war on crime" it soon became a war on minorities that has had a devastating effect on the politics of the US in a severely negative fashion.
On the post: How Copyright Extension Undermined Copyright: The Copyright Of Parking (Part I)
Re: Myths
Then why are so many artists revolting against the old copyright regime?
People make and sell their own music.
But they're not going to the labels and keeping their own copyrights. So saying that enforcement equates to they're making money on copyright is disingenuous and obnoxious at best.
It's a comfortable lie that you're only punishing lazy middlemen when you pirate, but many times you are punishing self releasing artists, indie film makers, and one man band record companies.
On the post: How Copyright Extension Undermined Copyright: The Copyright Of Parking (Part I)
Re: Re: Re:
And even as you say it, it has made no sense. The pirate sites don't make a lot of money. The people you represent do.
The people who consume the pirated content are of course looking for free content.
Again, nonsense. They click on the TV and they've paid for that content. People can look for free online in the form of Youtube streams. People can look for free in regards to new games that can be found for free. The concept of time shift from the Betamax ruling is not lost on anyone. Yet you ignore this important aspect to consider people thieves when they can find the alternatives at a time and a place that's convenient for them. Why must you continue to ignore actual facts for this moral belief in "But... But... Piracy" routines?
New' compared to radio and tv of course. No one was sharing music on the net 20 years ago. Pretty silly then to claim the phenom is 20 years old. In terms of content delivery, the law and copyright, it's NEW.
Again, this is short sighted and wrong. People are using new mediums of delivery at their convenience. Even if you think it's dead, time shifting is not gone. People can hear songs on the radio or their mp3 player. They can watch Cable TV or use the internet for news. They can play games on PC or find old games. This does not equate to lost money.
It's new monetary avenues. Why aren't you exploring what you can do with these new avenues instead of wasting time fighting things you can't resolve?
On the post: White House Cybersecurity Boss -- Who Argued Against Overhyping Threats -- Resigns
Not good
I truly hope I'm wrong, but the signs for Michael Daniel being as moderate as Howard are very slim IMO.
On the post: Hollywood Talent Turns To Kickstarter To Escape 'Institutional Censorship'
Re: Re: Re:
I think he's pretty much set for right now.
On the post: Citizen Video Evidence Helps Two Arrested Photographers Have Their Cases Dropped
Re: Re: exactly = where are the countersuits?
On the post: Facebook Trading Near Its IPO Price Means It Was Priced Right, Not That It Was A Disaster
A loss
Next >>