Slashdot Mirror


Lessig on Streamcast/Grokster Decision

scubacuda writes "Lessig has an editorial in Financial Times regarding the recent court decision in favor Streamcast (which distributes "Morpheus") and Grokster. 'The wisdom of this rule is something innovators in Silicon Valley are increasingly coming to see. When courts intervene to maintain copyright's balance, the inevitable consequence is that innovation is harmed. If every innovator with technologies affecting content must bear the burden of a lawsuit before his innovation can be allowed, there will be many fewer innovations in the distribution and creation of content. That in turn will harm artists and technologists alike. Better to let the innovation happen, and then consider whether the change caused by the innovation is so significant as to require new legislation by the legislature.'"

10 of 187 comments (clear)

  1. Lessig can kiss my ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    FIRST POST...!!!! YAYYY

  2. No sugar tonight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    No sugar tonight in my coffee
    No sugar tonight in my tea

  3. Re:I like Ian Clarke's idea by maharg · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    01100110 01110010 01100101 01100101 00100000 01110011 01110000 01100101 01100101 01100011 01101000
    free speech

    --

    $ strings FTP.EXE | grep Copyright
    @(#) Copyright (c) 1983 The Regents of the University of California.
  4. huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    It's early in the morning, and I haven't smoked enough pot yet. Does anybody know what he's talking about?

  5. CALLING ALL TROLLS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    trolls, please don't go to christdot.org anymore and post pornographic comments or .widen .their .pages they really hate that.

    thank you for your time.

  6. Try to read between the lines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    To inexperienced readers, Lessig may seem to have a point. Unfortunately, his arguments all too frequently turn out to be strawmen, or worse, outright fabrication.

    Allow me a rebuttal:

    We see ourselves as integral with a unitary world around us, which evolves according to natural law. In the simplest words: There is only one reality, which we call Nature: not the "my reality" and "your reality" of the subjectivists and not the separate spiritual and physical realms of the supernaturalists. We are a part of Nature and subject to Nature's laws. Within the scope of these laws we are able to determine our own destiny. If we err in our efforts there is no one to protect us from the consequences of our folly or our weakness. In other words, we ourselves are responsible for everything over which we have the power of choice: in particular, for the state of our environment and for the destiny of our race.

    This view may be contrasted with the Semitic view, which separates man from the rest of the world and postulates a divine but nevertheless manlike being who rules man and the world by supernatural law. Those who hold this view absolve themselves of responsibility for their fate. When faced with an undesired outcome of events they say, "It is God's (or Yahweh's or Allah's) will. "They believe that it is not necessary for men to concern themselves with the future, beyond planning for their own needs, because their god has everything under control.

    During the time when Europe was most strongly under the influence of Semitic ideology (and also today in some countries under Islamic rule, as well as among some fundamentalist Jewish and Christian sects in America and elsewhere), it was considered impious for a man to infringe upon the deity's prerogatives: specifically, to attempt to understand or influence the phenomena of Nature, or to change venerable social institutions.

    Our world is hierarchical. Each of us is a member of the Aryan (or European) race, which, like the other races, developed its special characteristics over many thousands of years during which natural selection not only adapted it to its environment but also advanced it along its evolutionary path. Those races which evolved in the more demanding environment of the North, where surviving a winter required planning and self-discipline, advanced more rapidly in the development of the higher mental faculties -- including the abilities to conceptualize, to solve problems, to plan for the future, and to postpone gratification -- than those which remained in the relatively unvarying climate of the tropics. Consequently, the races vary today in their capabilities to build and to sustain a civilized society and, more generally, in their abilities to lend a conscious hand to Nature in the task of evolution.

    Furthermore, just as the races may be ordered according to their levels of development, so may the individuals within a race. Some are better able to understand the world around them than others; some are more creative; some have better self-discipline or a stronger will; some have a more highly developed sense of responsibility. In a well-ordered society these differences will be reflected in varying degrees of influence or control over the course of the society being exercised by the various members of the society according to their varying individual qualities.

    In contrast to our view is that of the egalitarians, who believe that the differences in the levels of civilization of the different races and the differences in the social positions of individuals in our society are purely circumstantial and can be changed easily by changing the circumstances: e.g., the level of civilization in Black Africa can be brought up to the European level and kept there by providing economic and technical aid to make up for past "injustices," such as colonialism; and any individual can fill any position in society if he is given certain "advantages," such as good schools and a good home environment. Differences in attainment, standard of living, and degree of social influence, among races and among individuals, are therefore unnatural and unjust and should be done away with, according to the egalitarians. (c) 2003 TrollKore, Cryptofascist League. All rights reserved.

  7. Musicians.. by Locky · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    'Muscians.. Get a real job.' - Jerry Seinfeld

  8. I'll save you all the trouble! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    How to gain Karma like a pro!

    In this day and age, whoring Karma on Slashdot is easier than ever. With more moderators and a lower signal to noise ratio (If you don't know what that means, don't worry!) means that Karma can easily be gained by following a few simple rules when you are carefully crafting your Slashdot post.

    • Vaguely mention the DMCA. It doesn't matter what the topic of discussion is, those four magic letters glow like a beacon to any moderator with points.
    • You can get double points if you spell the acronym as DCMA throughout your post. This is especially effective if you're replying to someone who has just used the correct acronym in their post.
    • MPAA and RIAA are another pair of gems. Use the phrase "RIAA/MPAA" in every post you make, and that Karma will flow!
    • Always confuse the two. Complain loudly about the MPAA suing over MP3 downloads, or the RIAA trying to stop you from downloading DeCSS.
    • Don't bother to understand the difference between Patents, Copyrights and Trademarks. If the topic of discussion is about patents, claim that "this wouldn't have happened before the DCMA" (See above)
    • Always remember, It's Microsofts Fault! Try to craft vague conspiracy theories that include Microsoft.
    • Spell it "Micro$oft" or "M$". Moderators will lap it up.
    • If all else fails, blame the Government. Do not at any cost attempt to understand basic politics, as that will make you look opinionated. Just blame the current political leaders.
    • Likewise, blame the French. Double points if you use the phrase "Cheese eating surrender monkeys".
    • If you're losing the argument, start a flamewar about the war with Iraq. Accuse the other party of being French, or "a pinko commie"(See above).
    • Claim that you only download stuff using P2P to "try before you buy".
    • Start a flamewar by claiming that "Piracy isn't theft". Violently flame anybody who dares to disagree with you.
    • Double points if you attempt to defend your position by stating that you "wouldn't have paid for it anyway, so they haven't lost a sale".
    • The Iraqi Information Minister was funny, wasn't he? Your post should be like one of his speeches. It'll be funny.
    • Ensure your sig has a Karma joke in it. You know the ones, something like "Karma: Bogus!" Ensure you retype your sig every time you post a comment; double sigs look cool and you wouldn't want the people who have sigs disabled to miss out, would you?
    • Remember! Never, ever read the related article or any background information before you state your opinions. You're too busy to do that, and its not like the moderators will notice either!
    Good luck! Within no time at all, your Karma will be Excellent!
  9. pic by asv108 · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    What's with the weird profile angle or this obviously staged photo of Larry thinking. I like Larry Lessig's ideas a lot but maybe if he got some better photography he would win more Supreme court cases ;)

  10. Re:So Malthus May Have Been Right, After All by bofkentucky · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    A couple of questions At the first Earth Day, were the hippies screaming about global warming or global cooling? What changed their mind during the 80's, could it have been that their kooky scare tactics were proven wrong? I'm being serious here and every time I bring it up to a watermellon (green outside, red inside) harrassing me I get a STFU.

    --
    09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0