Slashdot Mirror

you are right. Protesters that chain themselves to a fence deserve to be Tazered over and over and over again. come on they chained themselves to a fence! chains can kill! the cops need to tazer the man so many time because of how dangerous he was! HE WAS ASKING FOR IT!

the following is from a previous slashdot discussion...

"this is also considered resisting arrest and in situations officers will repeatedly tazer a limp person to torture them or pay them back for making them work. This happens a lot with protesters who make 2 or more cops carry them off, One who chained himself to a fence was tazered enough times that the cop had to get a second tazer as he emptied his. The man refused to unlock himself, the cop was too pig headed to get a set of bolt cutters and drag him off and was intent in teaching the protester a lesson.

http://www.ourmedia.org/node/55217
http://digg.com/world_news/Police_attack_PEACEFUL_Anti_War_Protestors_with_tasers_dogs_pepper_spray

http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/18/1239237

for the actual slashdot article.

Sorry, but cops and "authorities" love to physically assault peaceful protesters. It happens so much I almost wonder if they train them to do it.

Back in the 50's and 60' it was not unheard of corrupt cops being beaten severely off duty, but they also fired and blackballed dirty cops then when they discovered they were doing wrong... today they get a 3 month paid vacation and protected by their other gang members.

Gangsters in the RIAA tell me that my computer and my MP3 collection are National Security Issues.

Gangsters in the USA House of Reps and the USA Senate sell my independence and my privacy out to the highest bidder.

Now a nation of independents 3000 miles away from the USA is supposed to feel bad because the Gangsters whole mode of control is failing?

I have this to say: Take that shit to trial, BITCH!

If you ever want to 'resist' then I highly suggest you just go limp, don't fight back. A limp body is still damned hard to move and makes it much easier for your lawyer to defend you in court than if you run, swing, bite, yell.

this is also considered resisting arrest and in situations officers will repeatedly tazer a limp person to torture them or pay them back for making them work. This happens a lot with protesters who make 2 or more cops carry them off, One who chained himself to a fence was tazered enough times that the cop had to get a second tazer as he emptied his. The man refused to unlock himself, the cop was too pig headed to get a set of bolt cutters and drag him off and was intent in teaching the protester a lesson.

http://www.ourmedia.org/node/55217
http://digg.com/world_news/Police_attack_PEACEFUL_Anti_War_Protestors_with_tasers_dogs_pepper_spray
http://youtube.com/watch?v=U9hL9Hy00pI
the internet is FULL of corrupt cops doing this to peaceful people because they are lazy.

Cops should be required to write a 12 page report for every time they pull the trigger on a tazer. If an offier tazers a person more than 3 times without good cause needs to be fired and blackballed from ever being in law enforcement ever again and possibly serve jail time, preferrably in with open prison population and let the prisoners know he is a cop.

as a cop you are public protectors, you are to PROTECT AND SERVE even the guy you are arresting based on your interpretation of the law. If any force is exerted you need to be punished HARD if it was inappropriate.

"So we'd lose all of the original work, and be able to 'mod' and 'remix' each other's derivative dreck. Woo hoo."

Well, you can find the first drafts of two novels here:

http://www.ourmedia.org/blog/17145

Who knows how things will shake out? Not that I call to get rid of copyright, but it does need some serious fixing though.

all the best,

drew

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=zotzbro

{'Well, perhaps it could. If trademark law was taken overboard,'

Well, there is a reason TradeMark and Copyright are different.}

You forget that this is all in the absence of any copyright law (from my point of thinking for this excercise) except where explicitly talking of copyright law.

{'This is just what people say about GPL code / Free Software and yet people do make money from it.'

Yes, but they have other streams in order to make money from [such as Red Hat having a support line and Asterik selling hardware to go with their PABX software]. People who are solely songwriters don't have other means to make money from their songwriting effort.}

I know, but the same hold for people who are exclusively code writers. I am about in that position of being only a songwriter myself (mostly lyrics actually as I can't really sing and don't play an instrument well enough either. I do work sometimes with a friend and sing to him and he tries to figure out from what I am singing what I am trying to sing!!!)

One problem is though is that the idea is out there, the licenses are out there in the wild and people are using them and experimenting with them.

http://musicians.opensrc.org/DrewRoberts
http://ccmixter.org/media/tags/attribution

Look around, there are more.

{So, unless there is some other means for them to make money, I don't have a problem with paying copyright royalties to perform their songs. [It's only one cent per performance, and most performers can afford that, even if they perform a concert with thirty to fifty songs, they should be making enough profit off each performance to afford 50 cents or so]. }

The trick is to find that some other means.

Is that how it is were you are? I need to look into it down here. Not that I need to know at this time personally. I do think that in some places it is a percentage of revenue though.

{Like I said, Copyright laws are consistent in what can and can't be copied.}

Perhaps by fiat, but not by some grand ste of consistent principles that anyone has ever pointed out to me or that I have found in all my searching.

Could you copyright a landscaped garden? Why is a cars coachwork not art? After all, at least in bygone days, sculptures of the designs were made before the actual cars were ever produced. This may all be done on computer now.

{The difference here is really in what is considered 'Performance art' and what is static art. It's not an inconsistancy as much as it is a differentiation as to the 'type of art'. }

But in the case of music or video which is recorded and not live, it is not in fact a performance. Not like a band playing a cover is a performance.

BTW - as an odd aside, I wrote a novel in november last year as performance art. I wrote in in an IRC channel on freenode. Some people even dropped in to watch the struggle at times.

The final unedited mess is here:

http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954

{It's not legal to claim you wrote something in public domain, but that would result in a plagiarism case. The copying of the work wouldn't consist of a crime, only the claiming it as your own work. }

Gotcha, so you say there is overlap and cases are brought under copyright as it is simpler. In the absence of copyright law though (remember) cases of plagerism could still be brought under the plagersim laws. (I have no reason to doubt you, I have just never read any plagersim laws.)

{If my memory of the 'fake' group of books is correct, they dumbed down the songs to have easier chords/melodies than the original songs.}

So they would be claiming a copyright in the arrangement? What about the original words?

{I think they dumbed down the chords for easier playing. Often they transpose everything for guitar into the key of 'C' as well.}

Dumbing dow

"I'll be performing in Perth,(Australia) on the 24th of February."

Cool.

"Yes, as some companies Trade Mark things like 'slogans' and stuff." etc.

Right.

"No, it can't be Trademark, as the Trademark laws are totally different."

Well, perhaps it could. If trademark law was taken overboard, and your name was a trademark, I could not say that this song was by you as I would be using your name/trademark. What I am saying is that I don't think trademark should be able to be used for such a purpose.

"For instance, I don't see how you would expect a songwriter to make a living from this. I write a song, if there is no copyright on it, then anyone can record it and I get nothing for my efforts."

Don't worry, I don't think we are likely to see copyright law done away with in our lifetimes. That said. This is just what people say about GPL code / Free Software and yet people do make money from it. I, myself am experimenting with releasing some workd under a Creative Commons BY-SA license. Feel free to record my song lyrics if you like them. While if you make large bucks from them, I wouldn't mind you sharing the bounty, there is no legal requirement put on you to do so once you follow the license terms.

"It doesn't matter if I place a trademark on it, that doesn't even prove I wrote it. Trademark doesn't actually stop people from claiming they wrote my song. That's why Henry the Eighth once added a bar to the end of a song and then put his name on it. Copyright is the part of the law which stops people doing that sort of thing."

A king in those days could do a lot that a normal man couldn't and can't today. I think you may be mixing plagerism and copyright thoughts and even the law may. In the absence of copyright law, copying someone's work and claiming that it is your work would still be two different things. We could easily have a no-plagerism law without a copyright law if everyone in the world wanted things that way.

"Copyright laws are pretty consistent with what can and can't be copyrighted."

Well, if I put up a statue of mine in my front yard, you can't take a picture of it from the public road and sell copies of your picture of my statue. If I design a car and the coachwork and have that in my driveway, it is my understanding that you could take a picture of it from the public road and sell pictures of it for a proft. Without my permission and compensation. (At least that is what I have been lead to believe in reading things over the years.)

In the US, at least, there are compulsary licenses for music but not for pictures or plays. (I think.)

If you are a store and you play music in your shop, you must pay performance royalties, If you hang my pictures in your shop, you don't have to pay performance royalties. (I think.)

I could probably go on and on.

"Without copyright laws anyone can make a copy of those photos and claim they took them."

Either that is not the case, or copyright incorporates elements of plagerism as well as copying, or copyright law negates the need for plagerism law and so we haven't written any. So, is it legal then to claim that you wrote something in the public domain? After all, those works are not under copyright.

"You're selling your photo's for $1. In a world without copyright someone could buy that photo and then copy it and sell it as many times as they like."

Check this page:

http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145

They can already do that with what they get from there. The license I put on those works permits it.

This is the experiment I was running between that site and the lulu site:

http://www.ourmedia.org/node/42417

"No, actually you can't do that at all. If a piece of sheet music is in public domain, then you can't claim a copyright on it. You can however, do research into different versions of the music and create your own version of sh

"I'll be performing in Perth,(Australia) on the 24th of February."

Cool.

"Yes, as some companies Trade Mark things like 'slogans' and stuff." etc.

Right.

"No, it can't be Trademark, as the Trademark laws are totally different."

Well, perhaps it could. If trademark law was taken overboard, and your name was a trademark, I could not say that this song was by you as I would be using your name/trademark. What I am saying is that I don't think trademark should be able to be used for such a purpose.

"For instance, I don't see how you would expect a songwriter to make a living from this. I write a song, if there is no copyright on it, then anyone can record it and I get nothing for my efforts."

Don't worry, I don't think we are likely to see copyright law done away with in our lifetimes. That said. This is just what people say about GPL code / Free Software and yet people do make money from it. I, myself am experimenting with releasing some workd under a Creative Commons BY-SA license. Feel free to record my song lyrics if you like them. While if you make large bucks from them, I wouldn't mind you sharing the bounty, there is no legal requirement put on you to do so once you follow the license terms.

"It doesn't matter if I place a trademark on it, that doesn't even prove I wrote it. Trademark doesn't actually stop people from claiming they wrote my song. That's why Henry the Eighth once added a bar to the end of a song and then put his name on it. Copyright is the part of the law which stops people doing that sort of thing."

A king in those days could do a lot that a normal man couldn't and can't today. I think you may be mixing plagerism and copyright thoughts and even the law may. In the absence of copyright law, copying someone's work and claiming that it is your work would still be two different things. We could easily have a no-plagerism law without a copyright law if everyone in the world wanted things that way.

"Copyright laws are pretty consistent with what can and can't be copyrighted."

Well, if I put up a statue of mine in my front yard, you can't take a picture of it from the public road and sell copies of your picture of my statue. If I design a car and the coachwork and have that in my driveway, it is my understanding that you could take a picture of it from the public road and sell pictures of it for a proft. Without my permission and compensation. (At least that is what I have been lead to believe in reading things over the years.)

In the US, at least, there are compulsary licenses for music but not for pictures or plays. (I think.)

If you are a store and you play music in your shop, you must pay performance royalties, If you hang my pictures in your shop, you don't have to pay performance royalties. (I think.)

I could probably go on and on.

"Without copyright laws anyone can make a copy of those photos and claim they took them."

Either that is not the case, or copyright incorporates elements of plagerism as well as copying, or copyright law negates the need for plagerism law and so we haven't written any. So, is it legal then to claim that you wrote something in the public domain? After all, those works are not under copyright.

"You're selling your photo's for $1. In a world without copyright someone could buy that photo and then copy it and sell it as many times as they like."

Check this page:

http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145

They can already do that with what they get from there. The license I put on those works permits it.

This is the experiment I was running between that site and the lulu site:

http://www.ourmedia.org/node/42417

"No, actually you can't do that at all. If a piece of sheet music is in public domain, then you can't claim a copyright on it. You can however, do research into different versions of the music and create your own version of sh

"All the people complaining about DRM should actually DO something"

DONE.

Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel - http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954

Tings - Anuddah Bahamian Novel - http://www.ourmedia.org/node/85937 &
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/111123

drew Roberts's Storefront - Lulu.com - http://www.lulu.com/zotz

Some tings for you from zotz : CafePress.com - http://www.cafepress.com/zotz

Now for some other stuff of mine:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=zotzbr o&search=Search
http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=(creator%3 A%22drew%20Roberts%22)%20OR%20(collection%3A(ourme dia)%20AND%20%2Fmetadata%2Fauthor%3A(drew%20Robert s))
http://code.google.com/p/drsoundwall/
http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145
http://musicians.opensrc.org/DrewRoberts
https://sourceforge.net/projects/zbcw

I am not the only one doing such things either. For instance:

http://ccmixter.org/media/tags/attribution

"so CREATE something yourself and see how it works voluntarily instead of forcing authors to agree with your politics."

Ah, I am not the one running to get copyright laws amended over and over. Retroactively. There was a legal (lopitical?) agreement made with the public, but it wasn't good enough for some. They wanted to change the agreement. Now it is wrong for others to change it back to something more like it was? Or even completely different?

Seems some people are trying to force us into new "agreements." Why should we not fight back?

all the best,

drew

"All the people complaining about DRM should actually DO something"

DONE.

Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel - http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954

Tings - Anuddah Bahamian Novel - http://www.ourmedia.org/node/85937 &
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/111123

drew Roberts's Storefront - Lulu.com - http://www.lulu.com/zotz

Some tings for you from zotz : CafePress.com - http://www.cafepress.com/zotz

Now for some other stuff of mine:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=zotzbr o&search=Search
http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=(creator%3 A%22drew%20Roberts%22)%20OR%20(collection%3A(ourme dia)%20AND%20%2Fmetadata%2Fauthor%3A(drew%20Robert s))
http://code.google.com/p/drsoundwall/
http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145
http://musicians.opensrc.org/DrewRoberts
https://sourceforge.net/projects/zbcw

I am not the only one doing such things either. For instance:

http://ccmixter.org/media/tags/attribution

"so CREATE something yourself and see how it works voluntarily instead of forcing authors to agree with your politics."

Ah, I am not the one running to get copyright laws amended over and over. Retroactively. There was a legal (lopitical?) agreement made with the public, but it wasn't good enough for some. They wanted to change the agreement. Now it is wrong for others to change it back to something more like it was? Or even completely different?

Seems some people are trying to force us into new "agreements." Why should we not fight back?

all the best,

drew

"All the people complaining about DRM should actually DO something"

DONE.

Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel - http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954

Tings - Anuddah Bahamian Novel - http://www.ourmedia.org/node/85937 &
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/111123

drew Roberts's Storefront - Lulu.com - http://www.lulu.com/zotz

Some tings for you from zotz : CafePress.com - http://www.cafepress.com/zotz

Now for some other stuff of mine:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=zotzbr o&search=Search
http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=(creator%3 A%22drew%20Roberts%22)%20OR%20(collection%3A(ourme dia)%20AND%20%2Fmetadata%2Fauthor%3A(drew%20Robert s))
http://code.google.com/p/drsoundwall/
http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145
http://musicians.opensrc.org/DrewRoberts
https://sourceforge.net/projects/zbcw

I am not the only one doing such things either. For instance:

http://ccmixter.org/media/tags/attribution

"so CREATE something yourself and see how it works voluntarily instead of forcing authors to agree with your politics."

Ah, I am not the one running to get copyright laws amended over and over. Retroactively. There was a legal (lopitical?) agreement made with the public, but it wasn't good enough for some. They wanted to change the agreement. Now it is wrong for others to change it back to something more like it was? Or even completely different?

Seems some people are trying to force us into new "agreements." Why should we not fight back?

all the best,

drew

"All the people complaining about DRM should actually DO something"

DONE.

Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel - http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954

Tings - Anuddah Bahamian Novel - http://www.ourmedia.org/node/85937 &
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/111123

drew Roberts's Storefront - Lulu.com - http://www.lulu.com/zotz

Some tings for you from zotz : CafePress.com - http://www.cafepress.com/zotz

Now for some other stuff of mine:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=zotzbr o&search=Search
http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=(creator%3 A%22drew%20Roberts%22)%20OR%20(collection%3A(ourme dia)%20AND%20%2Fmetadata%2Fauthor%3A(drew%20Robert s))
http://code.google.com/p/drsoundwall/
http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145
http://musicians.opensrc.org/DrewRoberts
https://sourceforge.net/projects/zbcw

I am not the only one doing such things either. For instance:

http://ccmixter.org/media/tags/attribution

"so CREATE something yourself and see how it works voluntarily instead of forcing authors to agree with your politics."

Ah, I am not the one running to get copyright laws amended over and over. Retroactively. There was a legal (lopitical?) agreement made with the public, but it wasn't good enough for some. They wanted to change the agreement. Now it is wrong for others to change it back to something more like it was? Or even completely different?

Seems some people are trying to force us into new "agreements." Why should we not fight back?

all the best,

drew

"That is why it is different then other property. They want indeffinate copyright?"

Tax them on the value of the work...

See the first comment at this link:

http://www.digitalproductions.co.uk/index.php?id=4 3#comment

Let me know if you like it and if you can see ways to improve it if you would be so kind.

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954

"Largely, legal reductions in fair use."

Gotcha, and I might make that bargain as well, but the problem I see is at least twofold.

1. They can make it and then pull the same foolishness with retroactive extensions that they do now.

2. They can't even get the public to comply now with these lesser 'controls' and the current extreme punishments. How are they ever gonna get the public to go along with extra 'controls' while lessening the punishments. (They really do need to lessen the punishments.)

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel
NaNoWriMo 2006 winning novel (in progress)

The reason for number 5 is so that they choose an honest value for the work for tax purposes re point 4. It eliminates all the trouble of having a govenrment bureaucrat assess the value and all that goes along with it.

In essence, you tell us what it is worth, we will tax you based on the value you give us. Be honest with us though because we will force you to sell the copyright at the value you give us. (a few tweaks might help.)

"I'm also not wild about copylefted works being copyleft for the life of the author (honestly, that could just make someone a target for assassination--I know it sounds crazy, but it's true.)"

I don't doubt it, but that is true for copyright works now, which means all of your works probably. I have never heard of anyone being killed for it though. Anyone? Still... OK, copyleft is for 5,000 years. Seems like the supremes in the US would be ok with the idea that 5,000 yeas is a limited time as per the US constitution. (IE, now it is life + x years.)

"I really don't see a good reason to limit the price that the work can be sold for, particularly a copylefted work"

I guess something is not clear. In 4, copyleft works are not taxed, only copyright works, and so 5the forced sales of 5 do not apply as they are only there to promote honesty in step 4.

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
CC BY-SA (trying to copyleft my 'novels')
Enjoy...

"Otherwise, it's all handled in civil courts."

To be honest, I am not sure that doing things in the civil courts with the hugh statutory damages is mugh better.

At least in criminal court there would be a higher burden of proof.

The hugh potential "monetary punishments" are fairly horrendous as well. Down here, I think the monetary side is something like 20,000 or 25,000 per disk as well as the jail time mentioned...

"Well, I said stricter controls..."

I noticed that, what sort of stricter controls do you envision with lesser punishments? (Or equal punishments?)

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/111123

"The entire value of the book is wrapped up in its IP, because copies have a trivial cost (compare to 200 years ago, when printing books had a significant cost)."

Well, I am putting my time where my mouth is and experimenting with other possibilities:

http://www.ourmedia.org/node/85937
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/187924

"I'd be really ecstatic if there were stricter controls even than we have now--as long as the length of copyright was reduced drastically and keys were escrowed with the government and released at the end of the copyright term."

Well, I would say that you are not thinking straight or that the punishments in your country are no where near as bad as they are in mine. How does 4 or 5 years in a reputedly very nasty jail for each non-genuine CD or DVD in your posession sound? (By that I mean even ones that you may have purchesed in good faith and been ripped off in the purchase because you were sold a bogus disk.)

I am fine with the drastically reduced terms though.

Would you care to comment on the first comment at this link:

http://www.digitalproductions.co.uk/index.php?id=4 3#comment

I am also experimenting with music:

http://musicians.opensrc.org/DrewRoberts

and am thinking about messing somehow with a movie next year...

all the best,

drew

"The entire value of the book is wrapped up in its IP, because copies have a trivial cost (compare to 200 years ago, when printing books had a significant cost)."

Well, I am putting my time where my mouth is and experimenting with other possibilities:

http://www.ourmedia.org/node/85937
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/187924

"I'd be really ecstatic if there were stricter controls even than we have now--as long as the length of copyright was reduced drastically and keys were escrowed with the government and released at the end of the copyright term."

Well, I would say that you are not thinking straight or that the punishments in your country are no where near as bad as they are in mine. How does 4 or 5 years in a reputedly very nasty jail for each non-genuine CD or DVD in your posession sound? (By that I mean even ones that you may have purchesed in good faith and been ripped off in the purchase because you were sold a bogus disk.)

I am fine with the drastically reduced terms though.

Would you care to comment on the first comment at this link:

http://www.digitalproductions.co.uk/index.php?id=4 3#comment

I am also experimenting with music:

http://musicians.opensrc.org/DrewRoberts

and am thinking about messing somehow with a movie next year...

all the best,

drew

"The entire value of the book is wrapped up in its IP, because copies have a trivial cost (compare to 200 years ago, when printing books had a significant cost)."

Well, I am putting my time where my mouth is and experimenting with other possibilities:

http://www.ourmedia.org/node/85937
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/187924

"I'd be really ecstatic if there were stricter controls even than we have now--as long as the length of copyright was reduced drastically and keys were escrowed with the government and released at the end of the copyright term."

Well, I would say that you are not thinking straight or that the punishments in your country are no where near as bad as they are in mine. How does 4 or 5 years in a reputedly very nasty jail for each non-genuine CD or DVD in your posession sound? (By that I mean even ones that you may have purchesed in good faith and been ripped off in the purchase because you were sold a bogus disk.)

I am fine with the drastically reduced terms though.

Would you care to comment on the first comment at this link:

http://www.digitalproductions.co.uk/index.php?id=4 3#comment

I am also experimenting with music:

http://musicians.opensrc.org/DrewRoberts

and am thinking about messing somehow with a movie next year...

all the best,

drew

"Some might view internet pornography as morally wrong but I wouldn't think it to warrant a lifetime sentence."

In my supposedly free country, if I understand things correctly, and I have chatted with a lawyer about it, one can get 4 or 5 years of jail time for each non-genuine DVD or CD that you have in your posession. I don't think that is warranted either myself.

I don't even think the statutory damages are warranted myself.

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel

And don't forget the semi-recent attempts to patent plots...

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings
See if you can find a plot in there to patent...

"As a for-profit company, Novell is interested in the opinion of the paying customers."

and

"as this could get them out of the market for small users, but big time into the real corporate realm"

Yes, but this could result in them not being able to distribute one of their main products. (I said could, not would.) It seems it has already seriously upset some of the main creators of their main product.

The fact that the details of the deal are secret is not helping them when they protest their innocence either.

Does anyone around here know how patent deals generally work?

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike

"From this point on I aim to only listen to copylefted music. Movies and TV? I'd rather have fun making a copylefted movie than killing my brain cells and liberty with an MPAA offering."

I am trying on the production end of the copylefted music front:

http://musicians.opensrc.org/DrewRoberts
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/145261 (I really need to do this one.)

Would you care to brainstorm on the movie side of the equation?

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel
CC BY-SA (think copyleft)

"From this point on I aim to only listen to copylefted music. Movies and TV? I'd rather have fun making a copylefted movie than killing my brain cells and liberty with an MPAA offering."

I am trying on the production end of the copylefted music front:

http://musicians.opensrc.org/DrewRoberts
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/145261 (I really need to do this one.)

Would you care to brainstorm on the movie side of the equation?

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel
CC BY-SA (think copyleft)

"Why not just sue the Internet and get it over with ;-)."

Al Gore doesn't have enough moola? ~;-) macaroni

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954

"It's looking more and more like the only safe user content to host is plain old text, and I think that's a damn shame."

http://musicians.opensrc.org/DrewRoberts

Some people are making works that should be safe to host. Fund the creation of more stuff with licenses you like and host those works.

You will get a positive feedback loop going and things may have a chance of being different.

Talk to your local bands about funding some of their songs under Free licenses.

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel

"All we did was build a communications network that spans the globe and allows even the most insignificant person to have access to information that less than a generation ago was the domain of governments and billionaires."

See, that's where you go wrong, that network of tubes was invented by political types and put together by plumbers. Get real!

~;-)

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel

"But I'm guessing GPLv3 just got a big boost in popularity. I wonder if the FSF is going to send Ballmer a thank-you note?"

Hey, that's my joke:

http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=206202&c id=16815084

Let's call this a case of great minds think alike. We never heard 'fools seldom differ' - no, not us! ~;-)

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel

"I'd almost be willing to say Sun has released more open source code than any other company."

Which goes to show how much Sun's multi-minded talking over the years has seriously hurt their image with many people. I know it has undermined my trust in them. I certainly have liked some of the things they have done over the years but I have not liked others and have not liked a bunch of things they have said.

Lost opportunities galore there I guess.

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel
CC Attribution-ShareAlike

"What am I missing here? (And I'm not being sarcastic with that, I genuinely don't understand why anyone would want to share the fundamentals of their creation in a way that would compromise any potential future earnings.)"

One thing you are missing is that you can cut costs with Free Software. Your costs. (Your tools can cost less for one.)

Another is that one can get paid up front for one's work. That is good enough for some and if they go the Free Software route, their work can impact your potential future earnings even if you don't.

The world seems to be going that way and to my mind, that is a good thing. The thing is to figure out how to prosper in the new market.

If you wan't to explore this more, give me a shout.

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel
Wherein zotz seems to be giving up potential future earnings
on his "literary" works...

Yes, but will google blur out the logo? Unless the colonel pays of course.

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Drop by and read the novel I am writing. (copyleft type license)
Or come to ##zotz on irc.freenode.net and watch it being written.
Till the end of Nov 2006.

I have something backwards?

What exactly do I have backwards? Are you claiming that copyrights and patents create or enhance Free Market Capitalism?

You will need to bring some serious arguments and lots of whatever to put that case across.

Oh, and those ad hominum references to lemmings don't work too well.

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel

"Remember, patent and copyright monopolies DESTROY free market capitalism. Microsoft, like most large software corporations, are absolutely terrified of a true free market in software."

Bingo. A point I have been trying to make for what seems like ages.

There are no free markets when it comes to goods protected by copyrights or patents. With copyleft you can perhaps get close to a free market in those goods.

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel

"An elderly Japanese bar manager and performer has been arrested for playing copyrighted songs on his harmonica."

"Again, I can't speak for Japanese law, but in the USA it is clear that it is the owner of the performance venue, not the artist, who has to pay this fee."

Perhaps he was an owner manager? Perhaps in Japan, artists can't play in clubs that don't display a "sign" indicating they have a relationship with a rights society? ??

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel (in progress)
CC Attribution-ShareAlike license

"The difference here is that this guy plays the tunes in his business establishment. One could reasonably argue that he does derive financial benefit from having music as a perk for his patrong."

Right, I think the issue is not his playing, but his owning an establishment where protected music is played. This little "trick" is why more musicians are not up in arms over how copyrights are operated. Musicians are generally not responsible for paying royalties on songs they cover live.

Now if the musicians were responsible and had to build the costs into their rates, more might have something to say.

I am not sure how this works for private parties. Can anyone enlighten us?

Also, I wonder what the situation is for buskers?

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel

Actually,

I have my issues with them. I also appreciate much of what they do.

Do no evil is ok... and do good might be better.

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings
A NaNoWriMo contest novel in the writing
use under CC BY-SA (most copyleft license CC provides)

This sounds like something I have been talking to my clients about for years.

They should see if people they are thinking of doing business with have provided an exit strategy for them should things not work out. A company/person that put you first would be happy to do so.

So many only want to provide an entrance strategy. They want to get you easily into their world and then lock your hip in.

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings
A NaNoWriMo novel in the making (copyleft type license)

"prepositional mix-up"

I like that. Good one.

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel
CC BY-SA licensed just for you

"According to Dvorak, it's only a matter of time before Linux is 'cracked' by Microsoft, meaning Microsoft figures out a way to run proprietary code on it."

Gee, everyone else knows how to run proprietary code on linux. MS can't be too swift if they can't figure that.

Perhaps more is meant by "run on it"???

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel
CC BY-SA

Ah, now I see your angle. I don't know what all the settlement called for but I can see how it might be an issue.

What was the proverbial sound called? Sosumi?

http://www.boingboing.net/2005/03/24/early_apple_s ound_de.html

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
'Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel'

If you actually my original post, you need to explain this. How in the world does a tech company funding the creation of copyleft music and video raise a trademark violation?

Either you are not seeing something, or I am not.

As you can see, I know the Apple vs. Apple issue was trademarks, I just don't see how that relates to the issue at hand.

all the best,

drew
(Who is willing to accept funding from major tech companies to produce copyleft lyrics and other text.)
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954

'Q: What would happen if the big tech compamies started funding the production of copyleft music and movies and the like?'

"A: The Beatles' label would sue. One of the biggest names in prosumer audio production is Apple Computer, whose name clashes with Apple Corps."

I don't follow get your reasoning (and you don't supply it.) On what grounds would they sue.

The Apple vs. Apple suit was over Trademarks wasn't it?

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel

"The one challenge is how do you allow playing away from a streaming signal - perhaps you allow a limited amount of music to be recorded and played at will - sort of like the Blockbuster / Netflix send a DVD model."

I think if you check the article again, he envisions that you can save any part of any stream you want. (Kind of implied in the thought that a person doesn't want to pay twice and also in the download=stream=download idea.)

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145
'Sayings' - a nanowrimo.org novel in progress
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license

Plus there is alwasy this:

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=204439&cid=167 01949

I think there might be some interesting possibilities in the answers to that question which now one seemed to want to try answer...

Q: What would happen if the big tech compamies started funding the production of copyleft music and movies and the like?

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
'Sayings', a novel in progress for the current nanowrimo.org competition.
It is released under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license.
Go to town...

First, you might want to note that I never proposed that they produce their own films, but that they fund the creation of copyleft films and music.

Second, why not take a little chance and try and answer my original question? As I say, you may find some thoughts/answers to your question in the answers to mine.

Hint, it is not so much about recovering production costs as it is a possible increase in their bottom line. Right? It will not hurt if things are very indirect, will it?

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel
A work in progress.

And what evidence or reasoning do you have to support this contention of yours?

Why not give a shot at actually answering the question? It might be worth it.

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/187924
Bahamian Nonsense

And why exactly would I have to answer your question first? Perhaps, if you tried to answer mine, some answers to yours might suggest themselves?

I am assuming that you get "copyleft" mind you.

I know, I know, but I am sometimes willing to run that risk.

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/85937
Tings -Anuddah BahamiaN Novel

What would happen if the big tech compamies started funding the production of copyleft music and movies and the like?

It might make for some interesting times.

all the best,

drew
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954
Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel.
In progress, watch it being written daily in ##zotz on irc.freenode.net

I believe Archive.org does allow FTP uploading. http://ourmedia.org/ uses a proprietary uploader, or did when we used it earlier this year.

You could also look at http://blip.tv/ and http://revver.com./ Both provide RSS and hosting for free and with Revver you can actually make money.

We use http://libsyn.com/ for some of our media hosting as well. They are good, reliable and cheap. They have FTP and tools to create a blog onsite (though we use a drupal site for our main site).

Good luck and create good podcasts!

It looks like OurMedia.org, which uses archive.org for storage has RSS for its users.

What do AOL, Yahoo, MSN, and the like snap up to compete?

FileRatings ( http://www.fileratings.com/Video ) lists these as the top sites:

http://www.metacafe.com/
http://www.castpost.com/
http://www.clipshack.com/
http://www.blinkx.com/
http://dailymotion.com/
http://blip.tv/
http://vidoegg.com/
http://www.vimeo.com/
http://www.phanfare.com/
http://vobbo.com/
http://ourmedia.org/