No, but if you don't like Mike's coverage of something, go start your own blog. It's rather "Tardian" of you to come here and complain because you don't like what he's covering.
Then stop doing it for free since you're a part of AOL. You're not retroactively entitled to anything for doing what you agreed to do at the price you agreed to do it for. I'm not sure why you would even think you would be.
Theft is a criminal offense. The most that this is would be a violation of TOS, which is NOT a criminal offense. Finite and infinite don't matter because if I have unlimited bandwidth, then it's unlimited; there's no way for me to take more bandwidth than I paid for. Since I paid for it, there cannot be any theft.
To me, it screams of a band getting called out on their excuse for not 'making it big.' Rather than simply admit, "No, we're not selling any music because we suck," they opted to blame the boogeyman for it. Things would have been fine, except someone poked around and found out the boogeyman didn't even know who these guys were.
"Now the stock answer from the TechDirt echo chamber is: gosh, I want to be pirated because I know that somehow, some way other money will finds its way into my pocket."
As opposed to selling something to nobody and no money finding it's way into your pocket?
If you think that point of this article was that you can't succeed without be being pirated or only those who are pirated can succeed, then you need to stop, take a break and try rereading it. (SPOILER: It's not.)
"I knew the paywall was misguided, but they spent that much on it? OMG. I'm a web developer, and I could have set up something that doesn't work for MUCH less than that!"
Hell, I could set up something that is easier to get around and cost MORE. If they're willing to pay $40 million for what they got, I'm sure I could sell them a paywall (for about $50 million or so) that turns itself off.
Mike, once again you've missed the point. Trademarking descriptive words and phrases has everything to do with preventing consumer confusion. The fewer companies that consumers have to choose from, the less confusion consumers will have. Really, these companies are doing the consumers a great service by winnowing down the choices they have to worry about. Less choices are really what people want.
On the post: Actress Sues Amazon Because Her Age Appeared On Her IMDB Profile
Re:
On the post: Actress Sues Amazon Because Her Age Appeared On Her IMDB Profile
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Professor Behind Two Chatbots Chatting Discusses What Happened
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Is It Infringement To Get Your Favorite Sports Team Logo Tattooed On Your Body?
On the post: Revisiting The Question Of Who Deserves Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This site is just out of touch.
On the post: Revisiting The Question Of Who Deserves Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This site is just out of touch.
On the post: Righthaven Dismisses Lawsuit After Judge Slams Its Business Model
Re: Re: Drop but not dismiss
On the post: Righthaven Dismisses Lawsuit After Judge Slams Its Business Model
Re: Re:
On the post: Righthaven Dismisses Lawsuit After Judge Slams Its Business Model
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Dumbest Lawsuit Ever? HuffPo Sued By Bloggers Who Agreed To Work For Free... But Now Claim They Were Slaves
Re:
On the post: Is Tethering Stealing Bandwidth?
Re: Devil's advocate
On the post: Which Would You Rather Have: 100,000 Unauthorized Downloads Of Your Music... Or None?
Re: Maybe not so dumb
On the post: Which Would You Rather Have: 100,000 Unauthorized Downloads Of Your Music... Or None?
Re: Sort of a lame question
As opposed to selling something to nobody and no money finding it's way into your pocket?
If you think that point of this article was that you can't succeed without be being pirated or only those who are pirated can succeed, then you need to stop, take a break and try rereading it. (SPOILER: It's not.)
On the post: The Emperor's New Paywall
Re: 40 Mill!
Hell, I could set up something that is easier to get around and cost MORE. If they're willing to pay $40 million for what they got, I'm sure I could sell them a paywall (for about $50 million or so) that turns itself off.
On the post: Did Limewire Shutdown Increase Music Sales?
On the post: Federal Courts Afraid Your Smartphone Might Be A Bomb
Re: Forget the phones, ban the lawyers!
Maybe I'm in the wrong article...
On the post: The Great Language Landgrab... A Result Of Misunderstanding Trademark Law
;)
On the post: Broadcasters To Sue Time Warner Cable For Making It Easier For People To See Their Shows & Ads
Re:
On the post: Good Question: How The Hell Did The NYT Spend $40 Million On That Paywall?
Re: A better question
I tend to agree with you, but the execs probably thought the amount would show their "seriousness" about it or something like that.
On the post: Good Question: How The Hell Did The NYT Spend $40 Million On That Paywall?
Re:
Next >>