I first subscribed to DirecTV in 2000, when I got angry at what was then Media One, now absorbed into Comcast. I was very happy with it for a long time. Service was good, technology was cutting edge. No reason to change since nothing else was cheaper.
Then came AT&T.
I used to use AT&T for internet until they imposed caps and overage charges. And when they bought DirecTV, customer service moved to an Asian call center where nobody knew anything, they just read scripts. The service itself, as well as the technology, began to lag the competition. And when AT&T announced there would never be another satellite launch, it was pretty clear they intended to force customers to there IPTV and streaming products.
The only other option for traditional TV around here is Comcast, and I changed to them. I don't think streaming only is ready for prime time yet, at least not for me. It requires too many different services and is too hard to find content.
I hate Comcast (used to use them for ISP as well). But they're better than DirecTV and that's saying something.
BTW, there's no question that corporations have rights. The questions are: (1) Are corporations, required to pursue only the financial interests of their investors, equivalent to human beings with all the rights that actual humans have? and (2) Is money the same thing as speech?
I do hope you're not coming down on the corporate side of either of those.
That's an interesting comment as Beschizza regularly drops the speech suppression hammer in the forums at Boing Boing. In fact, that's the reason I quit visiting that site. He has made it into an echo chamber for the college PC crowd.
Coulton's getting steamed over this is particularly ironic given that his arrangement rips off, note for note, the melody from John Denver's Leaving on a Jet Plane.
Anything he manages to squeeze out of Glee should merely pass through his hands on its way to the Denver estate.
"all new laws (and any re-authorizations of old laws) should come with clear and stated metrics that will be used the next time around to determine if the bill was successful. "
Used by whom? Congress? They'll do nothing else. A new bureaucracy? They'll be (a) huge and (b) seriously subject to regulatory capture.
All laws should sunset? Including laws against, let's say, treason and smuggling? Insider trading? Mortgage fraud?
I don't think you really thought this through before you wrote it.
a company as successful and generally admired as Apple that regularly reveals its dictatorial and monopolistic tendencies would deserve neither its success nor its admiration.
What you would think is that people would notice this at some point and stop thinking of Apple as a shining, benevolent wizard.
better than I ever could. Thor v. IRS is responsible for dramatically reducing print runs (thereby losing economies of scale) and dramatically shrinking editorial cycles (thereby increasing costs in a major way). Both of these, in turn, almost killed the used book market, which is a ghost of its former self.
I lived through that change. My intro physics book, Halliday and Resnick, cost $22 in 1977. It was the second edition. The first had been published in 1963. Today, physics texts are on a three year revision cycle, and fast changing fields like astronomy are revised every two years. Mostly, these revisions involve changing problem numbers and other trivia.
Mass market books changed in a similar way at the same time for the same reasons. Back lists essentially disappeared. Prices jumped from an average 75 cents for a mass market paperback to around $3. You can't plausibly attribute that to market forces since it preceded the mergers and acquisitions of the 90's.
He was the first to promote the Strategic Defense Initiative (aka Star Wars), produced a report linking pornography to crime, was deeply involved in the Iran-Contra scandal, believed the Miranda ruling should be overturned, and resigned in disgrace because of his involvement in the Wedtech scandal.
If this administration wants to rely on his judgment to support their policies, that's just sad.
many of which are also dropping association with the US Chamber.
The US CoC was taken over by Republican-associated lobbyists years ago and basically serves as a means of cloaking Republican party interests in a veneer of respectability.
Josquin des Prez: Missa Malheur me bat, Missa Mater Patris, and Missa Fortuna desperata
Thomas Malory: Le Morte d'Arthur
William Shakespeare: Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, Coriolanus, Macbeth, King Lear, Othello, Antony and Cleopatra, Cymbeline, All's Well That Ends Well, As You Like It, The Comedy of Errors, Measure for Measure, Twelfth Night, Two Gentlemen of Verona, The Winter's Tale, King John, Richard II, Henry Iv, Henry V, Henry VI, Henry VIII
Johannes Brahms: Variations on a Theme from Haydn
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: Concertos opus 297
Rachmaninoff: Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini
Dmitri Shostakovich: Symphony 15
Franz Schubert: C Minor Sonata, A Major Sonata and B flat Sonata
I'm bored at this point. Someone else pick it up from here.
Both the Declaration of Independence and the Preamble to the Constitution express the same point of view:
Declaration: ". . . that to preserve these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their powers from the just consent of the governed. . ."
Preamble: "We, the people . . . ordain and establish this Constitution for the government . . ."
In both cases, the view is that rights are inherent in our condition as human beings, and that power flow from the people to the government as a device for protecting these rights. There is no notion whatsoever of rights as something bestowed on the people by the government. Rather, it is power that is bestowed on the government by the people and may be taken away at any time.
Loopholes are odd quirks of the law, regarded as being somehow unfair or unintended, which the unscrupulous can exploit to their advantage.
Fair use is and always has been a part of copyright law since the Constitution first defined copyrights as intended for the benefit of society, not the protection of IP owners.
I've been the victim of that in more petty ways. They're intent on doing what is necessary to get the conviction. The question is what happens to them as a result? The answer is usually nothing. There are no real consequences for this sort of bad behavior because they are, after all, The Heroes (TM). The sad truth is that often, especially in small towns, the only thing separating police from perpetrators is that they managed to get through police training before being caught.
AT&T turns everything it touches to sh(t
I first subscribed to DirecTV in 2000, when I got angry at what was then Media One, now absorbed into Comcast. I was very happy with it for a long time. Service was good, technology was cutting edge. No reason to change since nothing else was cheaper.
Then came AT&T.
I used to use AT&T for internet until they imposed caps and overage charges. And when they bought DirecTV, customer service moved to an Asian call center where nobody knew anything, they just read scripts. The service itself, as well as the technology, began to lag the competition. And when AT&T announced there would never be another satellite launch, it was pretty clear they intended to force customers to there IPTV and streaming products.
The only other option for traditional TV around here is Comcast, and I changed to them. I don't think streaming only is ready for prime time yet, at least not for me. It requires too many different services and is too hard to find content.
I hate Comcast (used to use them for ISP as well). But they're better than DirecTV and that's saying something.
Verizon
corporate rights
I do hope you're not coming down on the corporate side of either of those.
Beschizza delenda est
Roadmap
Leaving on a Jet Plane?
Anything he manages to squeeze out of Glee should merely pass through his hands on its way to the Denver estate.
You don't own it
My paper books, on the other hand, belong exclusively to me and Amazon can't turn them off remotely.
No DRM. Score one for paper.
(untitled comment)
Used by whom? Congress? They'll do nothing else. A new bureaucracy? They'll be (a) huge and (b) seriously subject to regulatory capture.
All laws should sunset? Including laws against, let's say, treason and smuggling? Insider trading? Mortgage fraud?
I don't think you really thought this through before you wrote it.
what do you expect?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Dodd#Controversies
The man is a lying sack of shit and always has been.
No, you would have thought
What you would think is that people would notice this at some point and stop thinking of Apple as a shining, benevolent wizard.
purpose is not to prevent you from having thoughts
it is only partly lack of market forces
http://www.sfwa.org/bulletin/articles/thor.htm
better than I ever could. Thor v. IRS is responsible for dramatically reducing print runs (thereby losing economies of scale) and dramatically shrinking editorial cycles (thereby increasing costs in a major way). Both of these, in turn, almost killed the used book market, which is a ghost of its former self.
I lived through that change. My intro physics book, Halliday and Resnick, cost $22 in 1977. It was the second edition. The first had been published in 1963. Today, physics texts are on a three year revision cycle, and fast changing fields like astronomy are revised every two years. Mostly, these revisions involve changing problem numbers and other trivia.
Mass market books changed in a similar way at the same time for the same reasons. Back lists essentially disappeared. Prices jumped from an average 75 cents for a mass market paperback to around $3. You can't plausibly attribute that to market forces since it preceded the mergers and acquisitions of the 90's.
well I remember Ed Meese
He was the first to promote the Strategic Defense Initiative (aka Star Wars), produced a report linking pornography to crime, was deeply involved in the Iran-Contra scandal, believed the Miranda ruling should be overturned, and resigned in disgrace because of his involvement in the Wedtech scandal.
If this administration wants to rely on his judgment to support their policies, that's just sad.
not to be confused with local chambers either
The US CoC was taken over by Republican-associated lobbyists years ago and basically serves as a means of cloaking Republican party interests in a veneer of respectability.
Great moments in uncreative derivative works
James Joyce: Ulysses
Josquin des Prez: Missa Malheur me bat, Missa Mater Patris, and Missa Fortuna desperata
Thomas Malory: Le Morte d'Arthur
William Shakespeare: Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, Coriolanus, Macbeth, King Lear, Othello, Antony and Cleopatra, Cymbeline, All's Well That Ends Well, As You Like It, The Comedy of Errors, Measure for Measure, Twelfth Night, Two Gentlemen of Verona, The Winter's Tale, King John, Richard II, Henry Iv, Henry V, Henry VI, Henry VIII
Johannes Brahms: Variations on a Theme from Haydn
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: Concertos opus 297
Rachmaninoff: Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini
Dmitri Shostakovich: Symphony 15
Franz Schubert: C Minor Sonata, A Major Sonata and B flat Sonata
I'm bored at this point. Someone else pick it up from here.
rights or privileges?
Declaration: ". . . that to preserve these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their powers from the just consent of the governed. . ."
Preamble: "We, the people . . . ordain and establish this Constitution for the government . . ."
In both cases, the view is that rights are inherent in our condition as human beings, and that power flow from the people to the government as a device for protecting these rights. There is no notion whatsoever of rights as something bestowed on the people by the government. Rather, it is power that is bestowed on the government by the people and may be taken away at any time.
fair use is not a loophole
Loopholes are odd quirks of the law, regarded as being somehow unfair or unintended, which the unscrupulous can exploit to their advantage.
Fair use is and always has been a part of copyright law since the Constitution first defined copyrights as intended for the benefit of society, not the protection of IP owners.
No
If the courts have to step in to set boundaries, that indicates that far more is broken than just patent law.
officers lie all the time
laws are not contracts
So no. Duh.
More comments from pjcamp >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by pjcamp.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt