Slashdot Mirror


Chinese DVD Makers Sue Over Royalties

Viceice writes "Afterdawn.com and DigiTimes are among many other news outlets reporting that DVD player makers from China are suing the 3C DVD Patent Group over royalties on patents held by the consortium. The suit accuses 3C alliance for price-fixing, unlawful tying of essential and non-essential patents together, group boycott and conspiracy to monopolize. According to the Chinese companies, typically U.S. patent licensing fees for other products are between 3 and 5 percent of the item's wholesale price, compared to the 50 percent for DVD players."

127 of 208 comments (clear)

  1. At least they have the guts... by kusanagi374 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's obvious that the 3C Patent Group is guilty, but then... that's how things work in the western world, and such acts are protected by local governments.

    I only see this as the chinese companies trying to defend their position, nothing more. They want to be competitive, even more than they already are.

    1. Re:At least they have the guts... by Abhorsen · · Score: 1

      I agree. its not like the americans need the money. They are jsut trying to protect their home market.

    2. Re:At least they have the guts... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      I don't see the contradiction.
      1) I may consider the Chinese government to be evil, but I don't consider the US government to be good. And I question the sanity of anyone who does.
      2) An illegal cartel is an illegal cartel no matter the character of the entity pointing that out.

      One might question whether it actually IS an "illegal cartel", but you didn't see fit to do that. (And I recognize that "illegal cartel" is my term. I don't remember the exact complaint quoted above. I don't have fine distinctions in the ideas of that part of the conceptual spectrum.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    3. Re:At least they have the guts... by oliverthered · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So, which fat cat in China is getting richer because of this.

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    4. Re:At least they have the guts... by ZhuLien · · Score: 1

      actually, I'd rather a government like the Chinese government over the US or Aussie one any day!

    5. Re:At least they have the guts... by yog · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's true that there's a lot of cloning and ripping off of established Western brands and a general disregard for intellectual property rights going on in east Asia, but in this instance I think the Chinese companies have a point.

      They're claiming a patent cost of $20 per player. Think about it; it probably costs no more than $20 to make the damn things and who knows how much cheaper they'll get as they become totally commoditized. It's ridiculous. Pretty soon the majority cost of a computer system is going to be the IP tax. I say bring on the lawsuits and break this price fixing cartel.

      Better yet, bring on the blue-ray 50G disks and let's just get past this mediocre, DRM-encumbered DVD mess.

      --
      it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
    6. Re:At least they have the guts... by wizard_of_wor · · Score: 1

      Really? Then you must enjoy having your testicles electrocuted whenever you question the ruling party.

      --
      If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.
    7. Re:At least they have the guts... by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      Why would the next iteration of mass storage media be DRM-free ? content companies still have incentive to protect their properties, and the IP tax is working very well, thank you.

      With the current system even when production goes offshore the largest proportion of the benefits still goes to the inventors of the technology.

    8. Re:At least they have the guts... by ZhuLien · · Score: 1

      No, when I look at the overall picture of things, the Chinese gov looks a hell lot more appealing than the other two. Of course both have good and bad things.

  2. Is it just me? by nihilistcanada · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What does it say about the times we are in that the greatest champions of intellectual property freedoms are the constituents of the biggest dictatorship of the world?

    1. Re:Is it just me? by Jameth · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's interesting to note that, as India is an even bigger proponent of these freedoms than China, that the real champions of intellectual property freedoms are those in rising third world nations. This is the exact same position the US was in when it began its rise and it is interesting to consider that the economic situation of the country could so outstrip the cultural components in this manner. If you compare the three places, there are extremely few similarities, yet they all chose the same path when in the same situation.

    2. Re:Is it just me? by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > What does it say about the times we are in that the greatest champions of intellectual property freedoms are the constituents of the biggest dictatorship of the world?

      Wait a minute. The article says:

      "DVD player makers from China are suing the 3C DVD Patent Group over royalties on patents held by the consortium."

      I keep telling you folks: China is the beta test site for America 2.0. We let them make the mistakes, then we implement what worked over here. If we can get the Chinese to adopt our strategy of basing their entire economy on lawyers, and we can adopt their strategy of managing dissent (for values of "management" that include mechanized infantry), we win!

      We have lit a fire in the minds of men. It warms those who feel its power. It burns those who fight its progress. And one day - this untamed fire of freedom will reach the darkest corners of our world, EVEN THE THATCHED-ROOF COTTAGES!

    3. Re:Is it just me? by Mudcathi · · Score: 1
      What does it say about the times we are in that the greatest champions of intellectual property freedoms are the constituents of the biggest dictatorship of the world?

      Without any other context than your question, I'd say it means Linus, the whole EFF, the more enlightened members of IMB's management team, and a handful of Groklaw's more active members must have moved to North Korea.

      --

      "He who throws mud, loses ground." - proverb

    4. Re:Is it just me? by Mudcathi · · Score: 1

      meh! IMB = IBM (fumbly figners!)

      --

      "He who throws mud, loses ground." - proverb

    5. Re:Is it just me? by ad0gg · · Score: 2, Informative
      This is the exact same position the US was in when it began its rise and it is interesting to consider that the economic situation of the country could so outstrip the cultural components in this manner.

      Proof? Oh wait this is slashdot. Edison's 1000 patents. So when was the US championing freedom of IP?

      --

      Have you ever been to a turkish prison?

    6. Re:Is it just me? by Jameth · · Score: 2, Informative

      When the US originally declared independence and flat-out ignored all the restrictions Europe tried to place on such things.

      The US declared independence in 1776. Edison was born in 1847. By the time Edison was patenting things, the US was among the richest countries in the world. It still had a long way to go to where it is today, but it was doing quite well.

      Also, the US ignored it's own patents when Edison was around. Edison had patents on the camera which is why Hollywood is on the west coast: they didn't want to pay any patent royalties so they just avoided his collectors.

    7. Re:Is it just me? by zoftie · · Score: 1

      Time to start brushing up on mandarin and japaneese i guess.
      Say sayonara to english internet and english boot messages, time to buck down and purchase that japaneese dictionary you were eyeing for a while! ;-)

    8. Re:Is it just me? by dabigpaybackski · · Score: 1
      I wouldn't worry about that. The British Empire spread English all over the globe. The United States spread it even further. All international pilots and ATCs must speak English. Though it is difficult to learn to speak fluently, it does have a good phonetic alphabet and it readily assimilates new words to describe new concepts. In short, English is the Borg of languages.

      In terms of geopolitical power, Great Britain has been eclipsed, and the U.S. is at it's high water mark. Nevertheless, I think their linguistic influence will only spread with international trade in the years to come.

      --
      "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
    9. Re:Is it just me? by Progman3K · · Score: 1

      Big surprise, each side is pulling for a bigger piece of the blanket.

      --
      I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
    10. Re:Is it just me? by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 1
      Now, repeat after me...

      Washi wani Jong-gwo-ren Internet! (okay, I know my pinyin is really muddled!)

    11. Re:Is it just me? by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 1
      Because piracy is almost universal in China. If China actually had IP that was in demand, they would definately change their position.

      Which, funnily enough, simply puts them 100 years behind the USA.

    12. Re:Is it just me? by Jameth · · Score: 1

      Ummm...Japanese? The guys that have been in a recession for thirty straight years? Don't you mean Hindi?

    13. Re:Is it just me? by duffahtolla · · Score: 1
      Also, the US ignored it's own patents when Edison was around. Edison had patents on the camera which is why Hollywood is on the west coast: they didn't want to pay any patent royalties so they just avoided his collectors.

      Whoa! So the industry the MPAA represents owes its very existence to a bunch of IP Pirates?!!

      Forgive me, I always screw up the definition.. Is this Ironic?

    14. Re:Is it just me? by quarkscat · · Score: 1

      I did I pay way too much for that $50 DVD
      player I got that was made in China?

      If the Chinese win a reprieve from the WTO,
      maybe my next DVD player wil be free - just
      bundled with a movie 3-pack from MGM ...

    15. Re:Is it just me? by unitron · · Score: 1
      "Whoa! So the industry the MPAA represents owes its very existence to a bunch of IP Pirates?!!

      Forgive me, I always screw up the definition.. Is this Ironic?"

      No, just business as usual. The first rule of capitalism is to use someone else's capital to generate your profits.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    16. Re:Is it just me? by AndyChrist · · Score: 1

      Japan is in roughly the same position as the US with respect to China, and they are more interested in English for business than anyone except maybe the Koreans.

      The only reason you should brush up on your Japanese (besides WANTING to, 'cause while it may not get bigger it ain't going away) is that it will help you learn Chinese.

    17. Re:Is it just me? by bbc · · Score: 1

      "Whoa! So the industry the MPAA represents owes its very existence to a bunch of IP Pirates?!!"

      Are you surprised? Modern copyright law started with a desire to protect authors from publishers.

      Read Lessig's Free Culture, a riveting horror story (and the scariest part: it is all true).

    18. Re:Is it just me? by Raunch · · Score: 1

      What does it say about the times we are in that the greatest champions of intellectual property freedoms are the constituents of the biggest dictatorship of the world?

      I don't understand; the US isn't "the greatest champion of intellectual property freedoms".

      --
      George II -- Spreading Freedom and American values, one bomb at a time.
  3. China will be the death of the patent hegemony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just because the Chinese government is a murderous fascist 800-pound gorilla, and it is increasingly beginning to decide that Chinese industry shouldn't have to be burdened by the limitations of western patents. After all, since China is not going to become a research and development hub as long as they pursue the whole "stalinism lite" thing and all their best and brightest continue leaving for American universities, it isn't like China is benefiting from the patent regime at all. So why not just start ignoring it whenever it gets inconvenient?

    We've already seen this with the Red Dragon chip; this DVD thing may be the next big crack in the wall. Once Chinese industry is unburdened by patents, the rest of the world is going to have some other way to compete than government-granted monopolies on ideas in order to keep up.

    1. Re:China will be the death of the patent hegemony by hng_rval · · Score: 1

      Except that if they ignore patents completely they will be unable to export their wares into any of the large markets (US, Europe, Japan, etc).

      --
      Thank you Mario! But our princess is in another castle!
    2. Re:China will be the death of the patent hegemony by AaronGTurner · · Score: 1

      " After all, since China is not going to become a research and development hub" There's a lot of research (and increasingly so) going on there already. A long way to go, though.

    3. Re:China will be the death of the patent hegemony by Jameth · · Score: 1

      "fascist? No. There is no segment of the population that is systematically persecuted or denied equality."

      "murderous? No. China has not invaded another country for the last 200 years. It has not massacred it's indigenous populations."

      Perhaps you should go visit Tibet sometime.

    4. Re:China will be the death of the patent hegemony by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No. China has not invaded another country for the last 200 years. ... debatable. There's still Tibet which was, despite past security agreements between the two countries, for all intents and purposes a separate country. Moreover, China's act was agressive and they claimed the land as their own. Likewise, there are the Xinjiang separatist rebels. The US used to support these guys, though it seems there's a quid pro quo between Bush and Beijing where Washington has agreed to consider the Xinjiang separatists as 'terrorists' and in return Beijing supports the 'war on terror.'

      Re: Communism.

      China is closer to Facism than Communism at the moment, though there are elections at the local level and national politics are like an oligarchy. The whole 'economic equality and state ownership of labor' has gone out the window in the past ten years. Everything is on sale there now. Communism is dead in China.

      --

      ___
      It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
    5. Re:China will be the death of the patent hegemony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      "China has not invaded another country for the last 200 years"

      Give me a break. Ask any Tibetan and they will tell you what the Chinese mean when they say "the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet."

      China invaded Tibet in 1950 and remains an occupying force today.

    6. Re:China will be the death of the patent hegemony by SEE · · Score: 1

      So why not just start ignoring it whenever it gets inconvenient?

      Because when your economic growth is structurally dependent on export revenues, you don't want to give the governments of your markets an engraved invitation to shut down trade. And since respecting patents is a GATT/WTO obligation, ignoring them would be such an act.

      China exports most to the US and Japan. The patents it would be ignoring would be mostly US and Japanese patents. US and Japanese corporations would be really, really ticked off, and they have political influence. How long do you think those exports would continue?

    7. Re:China will be the death of the patent hegemony by HiThere · · Score: 1

      But China is already paying exhorbitantly to keep the export market. They own a large percentage of the US debt, artificially strengthening the dollar and weakening their own currency for this very reason. But that expense can get too high.

      One may really question what positive contribution the US makes to the world economy, and whether that balences what it costs the world economy to support it. If China decided that it was too expensive to support the dollar, they could start demanding to be paid in, e.g., Euros. This would be expensive, and China owns much of the US debt, and that would quickly devalue the dollar. But it would increase the value of the Euro, and so they would then be in a position to export to Europe. Or to other countries that were willing to buy what they had to sell.

      I consider that the US use of patents and other IP protectionism strategies to be only of value in the short term, and in the long term to be a very BAD strategy. And the long term may now be less than four years away. (Economic news hasn't been good of late. And debt has been increasing alarmingly.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    8. Re:China will be the death of the patent hegemony by dxxt · · Score: 1

      You probably need to specify the context. It's just like saying "US invades Japan in 1940's".

    9. Re:China will be the death of the patent hegemony by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 2, Informative

      China has not invaded another country for the last 200 years.

      Uh, you're so ignorant. China invaded India in 1962. Before you post things in future perhaps you should get your facts straight.

      --

      "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    10. Re:China will be the death of the patent hegemony by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      "Once Chinese industry is unburdened by patents"
      Once the Chinese refuses to be part of the patent process then no western nation will do business with them. There products will be outlawed and there export business will crumble. Any incentive for research in China will pretty much disappear since anything they develop will be considered up for grabs by the other nations. If they do respect other nations patents no one will respect theirs.
      So it will not happen. China will go through the courts and work with the patent holders. For China it is all about the exports.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  4. cheaper DVD players by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I can't wait for the $5 DVD players after the China DVD makers win their lawsuit! My $20 DVD player is too expensive!!!

    1. Re:cheaper DVD players by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Heh.

      This was moderated as funny, but don't laugh too much. Technically there's nothing stopping DVD players from costing the same amount as a low-end chinese discman knockoff.

  5. This is neither surprising nor representative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    of anything.

    You have to understand:

    The CCP isn't a champion of intellectual property freedom.

    They are champions of their intellectual property freedom.

    There's a big difference there.

    Dictatorships are always champions of their own freedom to do what they want, often at the expense of other peoples' freedom to do what they want. The whole China-Versus-Patents thing is just another example of that.

    1. Re:This is neither surprising nor representative by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I have mixed feelings about "intellectual property freedom". Thus far, the only thing China is really good at is copying and making things very cheap. I really don't think they innovate, because there is seems to be no incentive to do so. It takes too much time and effort to make a "better mousetrap" if you will, and so little time and effort to copy that it isn't worth it unless there is some protection on the design

      I don't like how US patents are abused, but I don't think doing away with patents will fix anything. You'd need a constitutional ammendment to do that anyway.

    2. Re:This is neither surprising nor representative by lightknight · · Score: 1

      For all the evil that patents may create, they stop an even greater evil. Many ./ers may go off about how the world may be a better place if we didn't have patents (software &&|| otherwise). I predict, that if we abolished patents, it would take three weeks for the US to tank (like being thrown into a gravity well).

      What people (in the US) fail to understand is how their jobs would totally not be there if patents were abolished. When anyone can copy your design, or make minor changes (it's blue, not green like yours), the countries in which labor is the cheapest will win, hands down. Think of patents as a dam, holding back some of the really bad forces out there.

      You lost your job? You think patents suck? Well, things will change when you have lost your job, and everyone you know has lost their job.

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    3. Re:This is neither surprising nor representative by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Note: I am deliberatly not commenting on what we should do or any other complexities. I am strictly addressing a point of fact.

      doing away with patents... You'd need a constitutional ammendment to do that anyway.

      No, you wouldn't. Nor would you need to ammend the constitution to abolish copyrights.

      If you look at the constitution, section 8 says "The Congress shall have Power..." and clause 8 says "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries". As with many parts of ths constitution congress has the power to do this if it chooses to do so. Copy rights and patent rights simply did not exists prior to congress chooing to pass a law creating them. Had congress done nothing they would not exist. Congress can simply pass another law eliminating them, if it choses to do so.

      There's even an early Supreme Court ruling that explicitly states that there is no inherent right to copy rights. That they only exist by congress's choice to grant them, and they only include the rights congress chooses to grant in them. I'm not aware of an equivalant ruling directly refering to patents, but copyrights and patents originate from a single constututional clause. They are identical in this regard.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    4. Re:This is neither surprising nor representative by Mad+Hughagi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I really don't think they innovate

      This is wrong on many levels.

      The barrier to implementing research in China is much lower than in the rest of the developed world. Not only in an industrial sense, but in almost every field. Check out the foreign investment and developments in Beijing. People who think that China is just another cheap labour base are not taking in the big picture.

      A professor was telling me that one of his collegues in China has graduate students willing to work 14 hour days 7 days a week, and lining up at his door to get a position in his lab. Contrast this with the declining number of graduate students (and the lack of funding for) in many fields in North America.

      Now that we have globalization these patents really only help the management crust of the corporations. Everything else will get outsourced if it optimizes the finances, barring the so called "federal" corporations who are heavily subsidized by the government. Welcome to the new global community.

      --
      UBU
    5. Re:This is neither surprising nor representative by daijo78 · · Score: 1

      "Thus far, the only thing China is really good at is copying and making things very cheap. I really don't think they innovate, because there is seems to be no incentive to do so."

      I think thats wrong. US share of published scientific work has decreased and the biggest explaination is a surge of scientific work from China. You dont put a man in orbit for instance just by copying. My guess is that a lot of the Nobel Prizes will go to China in 20 years. Sure they copy a lot too but building a industry copying consumer electronics together with progress in research will spin of much greater things.

    6. Re:This is neither surprising nor representative by pipingguy · · Score: 1


      Thus far, the only thing China is really good at is copying and making things very cheap.

      Like the Japanese used to be?

    7. Re:This is neither surprising nor representative by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      This is the only way to get out of the ugly marketting crapfest that is U.S. consumer society...

      I'm sorry but until U.S. advertising is talking about new developments instead of appearances there really isn't grounds for complaint..

    8. Re:This is neither surprising nor representative by Air-conditioned+cowh · · Score: 1

      "the only thing China is really good at is copying and making things very cheap."

      I remember the same was said of the Japanese in the 70s.

    9. Re:This is neither surprising nor representative by nzkbuk · · Score: 1

      Well I'd want to agree with you, but if you look at the volume of things that are outsourced already.

      It isn't just the first line tech support jobs that are going overseas, it's everything except senior management and look at the stupid salaries they are getting.

      There are already research, design & manufacture happening with the results then being filed through the US Patent office.

      The main problems about patients is that they were introduced when the lifespan of a product was 20 years or so. and the idea's that made patents would last almost unchanged for 50 years.

      Now things are happening at a much faster rate. I'm not sure if they need to be disposed of completely, but I'm sure you'd agree that they need a serious overhaul.

    10. Re:This is neither surprising nor representative by Znork · · Score: 1

      Your argument is invalid. You dont need any workers to own a patent.

      The countries with the cheapest labour still win, except now some rich guy gets richer, the products cost more for the consumers, and the rich guys money gets invested in low-wage countries anyway.

      Unless, of course, you're talking about illegal immigrants cleaning the houses of the patent owners for less than minimum wage.

    11. Re:This is neither surprising nor representative by dabadab · · Score: 1

      You know, it's interesting that Americans have thought the exact same thing about Japan before WWII - and they were shocked when faced with Mitsubishi Zeros that outperformed their aircrafts.

      --
      Real life is overrated.
  6. It's a fixed amount, not a percentage by jdhutchins · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The summary is a bit misleading- the 3C group charges $20 per DVD player, not 50% of the cost. Although $20 may end up being 50% of the cost of a DVD player, a $100 DVD player still only has to pay $20. Their argument of "but everyone else does it this way" sounds like whining that they can't make $5 DVD players.

    Maybe part of the reason the 3C is charging a flat fee is to prevent Chinese companies from severely undercutting their own offerings. They do have the patents on some DVD stuff, and I'm sure it's more than just worthless software patents. When you get a patent, part of the rights that you get is to prevent other people form using them, or making them pay a price of your choosing to use it.

    1. Re:It's a fixed amount, not a percentage by jonny4001 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Getting a patent does not give you the right to violate other laws, including antitrust laws. If you do, it is within the power of the courts to impose compulsory licensing.

    2. Re:It's a fixed amount, not a percentage by tota · · Score: 1

      > They do have the patents on some DVD stuff, and I'm sure it's more than just worthless software patents

      Right, useless code (css) and a logo (how creative!).

      Amazing stuff, I wish I could come up with things like that. Hang on... I can.

      --
      TODO: 753) write sig.
    3. Re:It's a fixed amount, not a percentage by PPGMD · · Score: 1
      They are technically illegal, distributing it without paying the fees.

      The DVD forum is in no way shape or form preventing anyone from making DVD players, anyone can make a DVD player or application, as long as they pay the $20 a unit fee. Within that fee they are allowed use of the various decoders, along with using the DVD logo.

    4. Re:It's a fixed amount, not a percentage by seinman · · Score: 1

      It's called a loss leader. Stores will sell some items at a loss, just to get you in the store in hopes that you'll buy other high-profit things while there. Usually it works, and even though they're losing money on that one item, it brings enough people in to the store that week to raise their overall profits.

    5. Re:It's a fixed amount, not a percentage by elpapacito · · Score: 1

      Thank you dude, you just proved 3C is price fixing at $20..they can do that because they don't have any competition.

      Maybe part of the reason the 3C is charging a flat fee is to prevent Chinese companies from severely undercutting their own offerings.

      Cry me a river, unfair competition ? It's curious how association of workers for workers rights is an unfair competition in a "free labor" (read cheap) market BUT chineses actually offering real competition (= sale price competition, competition to seize profit and market) to industries is unfair ! *Cry Cry*

      See what happenes when market is really out-of control-free AND pure unrestricted profit logic rules and human rights almost succumb to "laws" of market ? That chineses start to kick ass, because they're so bottom of barrel anything is better that their complete misery. That's a perfect environment for a profit fest.

    6. Re:It's a fixed amount, not a percentage by DarkZero · · Score: 1

      The summary is a bit misleading- the 3C group charges $20 per DVD player, not 50% of the cost. Although $20 may end up being 50% of the cost of a DVD player, a $100 DVD player still only has to pay $20. Their argument of "but everyone else does it this way" sounds like whining that they can't make $5 DVD players.

      Shouldn't they be whining about it, though? DVD players have gotten a whole lot cheaper than they were when they were first introduced. They used to be $300 or more, but now they're just $40, and the fee is still $20 per unit. Some things simply get much cheaper to make over time, like DVD players or CD-Rs. Would it make sense if a company was told that they have to pay a $3 fee for every CD-R that they make just because CD-Rs used to be expensive, when now they can be bought in 90 packs for $10?

    7. Re:It's a fixed amount, not a percentage by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Actually, DVDs use MPEG2, which is also what many digital satellite/cable offerings use.

      MPEG4 is newer technology. Keep in mind that all the technology for consumer hardware like satellite receivers and DVD players was developed about ten years ago now. You may be used to using DivX to encode MPEG4 on your PC, but that is only because you can download the codec-of-the-week in 15 minutes. DVDs all had to use lowest-common-denominator technology that couldn't be upgraded - so they had to use what was cheap to develop back when a DVD player cost $600.

    8. Re:It's a fixed amount, not a percentage by Electrum · · Score: 1

      How many Chinese people do you know can afford to pay 20$ for a DVD player? Or anyone else in a third world country for that matter?

      It doesn't affect most third world countries because US patent law doesn't apply. It only applies to DVD players being sold in countries where it does apply.

    9. Re:It's a fixed amount, not a percentage by Yartrebo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, it's up to the Chinese to decide what is legal and not over there.

      Don't forget that we are more dependant on China for their manufacturing capacity. If China was to embargo us and dump their dollar reserves, it might put a crimp in their booming economy, but it could very well induce an inflationary spiral and depression in the USA.

      Our economy is highly leveraged and vulnerable, their's is not.

      Both of us have enough nukes to obliterate each other, so saber rattling will only go so far.

    10. Re:It's a fixed amount, not a percentage by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wish that were true more than just in theory.

      When was the last time a court made anti-trust trump "intellectual property"? :( Excluding the Microsoft hand slappings.

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    11. Re:It's a fixed amount, not a percentage by ErikZ · · Score: 1
      How many Chinese people do you know can afford to pay 20$ for a DVD player?

      Well, according to http://www.china-embassy.org/eng/gyzg/t179428.htm , the average income has gone up 2.5 times.

      Assuming that their cost of living has stayed level, I'd every single person who's income has gone up 100% can afford a 40$ DVD player. Because their costs have stayed the same but their disposable income has grown.

      So what would that be, hundreds of millions of Chinese?
      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    12. Re:It's a fixed amount, not a percentage by SuperDry · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Regarding it being up to the Chinese to decide, it's not quite that simple. The Chinese have to abide by the patent laws in Western Europe, the US, and Japan if they want their products to be legally importable.

    13. Re:It's a fixed amount, not a percentage by rmccann · · Score: 1

      Could chinese companies ignore Europe and USA and still make a profit? There are a billion people in China and technologically it's growing. Could there be enough of a market there?

    14. Re:It's a fixed amount, not a percentage by PPGMD · · Score: 1

      China is still quite dependent on imports of food such as rice and grain. So though the companies would profit, significant portions of their population would starve.

  7. Good time for them to sue by Szentigrade · · Score: 1

    This is a great time for the chinease to make an issue out of this. When blu-ray and HD-DVD become available the consortiums will think twice before trying to rip them off again. I guess they are just ensuring that this doesnt happen to them again.

    --
    When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up... reading.-Henny Youngman
  8. CSS Anyone? by sepluv · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Maybe, this lawsuit could also be an opportunity to challenge their forcing the use of CSS (and regions) (in violation of the DVD video standard, misleading-advertsing laws and anti-trust laws) on most films to further their monopoly.

    --
    Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
    [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
  9. yes and no by ecalkin · · Score: 1

    nope, they will not want to pay more. but if stuff can't be outsoured to a cheap county that will follow patent law, there are alot of people here (US) that would be thrilled by factory assembly jobs.
    so if china gets cut off and dvd players can't be made inexpensively elsewhere, people will have a choice for dvd players: pay more or go without.

    eric

  10. Another creepy twist of fate... by Weaselmancer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A Chinese company pushing for consumer rights.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re:Another creepy twist of fate... by Exluddite · · Score: 1

      The Chinese just don't want to pay for intellectual property. What else is new? My father did business in China back in the 80's. The first thing that had to be ironed out was the fact that certain processes in the factory were designs that were obviously stolen from his company (well, obvious to an engineer anyway. It all looked like drawings of pipes and wires to me). Apparently it took a while to get them to understand what the problem was.

      --
      What does this button do...
  11. 50 % by zymano · · Score: 1

    Didn't know that.

    That's just ridiculous. Just another form of price fixing monopolies.

  12. It's not a US technology by Animats · · Score: 3, Informative
    This has nothing to do with US technology. The 3C patent group is Sony, Pioneer, and Philips.

    You cannot build a CD or DVD device without licensing technology from Japan. Or even a VCR, as Go Video found. American companies no longer own the key consumer electronics technologies.

    1. Re:It's not a US technology by Dance_Dance_Karnov · · Score: 1

      Philips is a European company, netherlands I think.

    2. Re:It's not a US technology by Bluetick · · Score: 1

      And Pioneer is a US company. The parent's point wasn't that this isn't an issue of Chinese manufacturers versus American patent holders, because the patents come from all over the world.

    3. Re:It's not a US technology by evilviper · · Score: 4, Informative
      This has nothing to do with US technology.

      No, but it has everything to do with the US patents.

      The defendants are the US branches of these companies. And the legalities are up to US courts.

      If the court rules that the fees much be reduced, then all DVD players sold in the US can pay those reduced fees. The fees might remain massively high in Japan, but that doesn't matter for DVD players in the US.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    4. Re:It's not a US technology by dustmite · · Score: 1

      The technologies weren't "outsourced" there, nor was the development of the technology: They were invented there. The CD-ROM was created by Sony and Philips (Japan + Netherlands).

  13. I am with China on this. by agent · · Score: 1

    Just look under your Micro$oft keyboard, and you will know why. Made in...
    Surf the Internet via the robots.txt, it is a lot more fun.
    Peace.

  14. They think they can win. I'm shocked! by AndroidCat · · Score: 1
    Handal & Associates, [..] indicated that its national class action lawsuit against the 3C DVD Patent Group [..] may eventually be successful, according to lead attorney Anton Handal
    Somehow I can't imagine him saying that they don't stand a chance. And I wonder how long "eventually" will be.
    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    1. Re:They think they can win. I'm shocked! by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Well, judging by the SCOX case(s), expect it to take multiple years even if it's an open and shut case.

      Both sides can afford good lawyers, and appearantly a good lawyer can tie things up forever.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  15. Those poor companies... by imsabbel · · Score: 1

    the dvd-consortium made the standarts, convinced the studios, established a market just waiting for hundreds of million players for those companies to produce and sell. A market that wouldnt have existed without the standart.

    --
    HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
  16. hahaha by geekoid · · Score: 1

    yeah, there chamoion freedoms for the consumer..sure.

    What they are doing is trying to get into the game without playing by the rules.
    Once they relly start to peak, you bet your ass they will want very tight IP laws.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  17. Francis Cabot Lowell by mcc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Believe it or not, the world still existed before 1900. Ever hear of Francis Cabot Lowell? In the early 1800s Britain's industry had some of the best industrial technology in the world, and they viciously protected their trade secrets, trying to make sure that no one else could get hold of their stuff. Francis Cabot Lowell around 1810 wanted to start some modern textile mills in New England, so he went over to England, got a job in a textile mill, examined the machines until he understood them, reverse-engineered the schematics and then memorized them, and came back to New England knowing how to build them himself. This is how the powered loom came to North America, It was the first example of industrial espionage in history that I'm aware of.

    If you look at the period during which the U.S. began its rise as an international economic power-- not the post-Reconstruction period during which it had already completed that rise, which is where Edison existed-- you see LOTS of examples of stuff like this, over multiple areas of intellectual property. Witness Charles Dickens' desperate attempts to get America's book publishers to actually respect his copyrights...

    1. Re:Francis Cabot Lowell by cheesybagel · · Score: 3, Interesting
      This is how the powered loom came to North America, It was the first example of industrial espionage in history that I'm aware of.

      Industrial espionage goes way before that.

      Quote:
      The methods of securing silk and weaving fabrics from it were held secret by the Chinese for nearly two thousand years. Alexander the Great was credited with discovering it in India during the Third Century B.C., though for centuries afterward Westerners could only import this mysterious new fabric. It was among the Chinese a capital offense to reveal the secrets of the trade or to export the eggs from which the worms were hatched, but that didn't stop two priests from smuggling some eggs in the hollows of their bamboo staffs and bringing them to Constantinople in 555 A.D. However, silk continued to be imported from Asia, as silk production in Europe was fraught with disaster and danger. Attempts to raise silkworms consistently failed, due to the difficulty of growing healthy mulberry trees. Even today, while many efforts have been made to produce silk in the United States and Europe, most raw silk still comes from China, Japan, Bengal, and other Asian countries, where labor is cheap, and the requisite Bombyx mori and mulberry leaves are plentiful.

  18. This is a sign that China is caving on patents by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

    In the past, a lot of "no-name" DVD players were manufactured by chinese companies that just flat out ignored the patents held by the DVD consortium.

    By going to court over the issue, these companies are tacitly accepting the western-style patent regime that the USA is trying to force on the rest of the world.

    This new acceptance is probably part of the fallout of the Secretary of Commerce, Donald Evans's recent trip to Beijing. As was the recent arrest of bittorrent user in HK.

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    1. Re:This is a sign that China is caving on patents by fireboy1919 · · Score: 1

      ...or it could be a realization that they can sell the most DVDs in the USA and Japan, and they can't get them into the stores unless it's legal. I thik the economic reasons are a lot stronger than the political ones.

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    2. Re:This is a sign that China is caving on patents by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      For one - from China's point of view economics and politics are the same thing. That's why it was the secretary of commerce that came a visiting.

      For two - They have been selling their patent-scofflaw players in the USA for years already with the 3C (MPEG patent stuff) fees at $20 and the 5C (copy prevention patent stuff) fees at around $10, there is no way places like wal-mart and circuit city could carry players at ~$50 retail that were fully patent-kosher.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    3. Re:This is a sign that China is caving on patents by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      According to a recent article in the Economist, since joining the WTPO and putting those laws on the books, things got "worse" not better. Primarily because of two factors - huge increases in companies doing business and little funding of the agencies that are suppossed to enforce those laws.

      If you know the history of the West trying to do business in China, that result was no surprise. Whether it is a cultural difference or not, Western businesses have often entered into agreements with Chinese businesses only to have the Chinese "end of the bargain" dropped. In essence, in joining the WTPO, China said "yes, we will agree to all of your rules, wink, wink, nudge, nudge."

      Thus, it is the actual enforcement of the rules, not the creation of them, that signifies a (possible) sea-change in China's approach towards intellectual property. We'll know in a year or so if this recent activity was just a dog and pony show for the secretary of commerce, or an actual change in chinese market philosophy.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  19. Foriegn courts by cyberfunk2 · · Score: 1

    Hrm, at least they're smart enough to sue in the USA, where they have a chance of winning and actually getting the lawsuit enforced.

    Now if foriegn courts would just be so nice about things such as spam and child pornography.

    Anyone else ever feel like we're getting the raw deal, their complaints tend to get reasonably addressed, but ours tend to get thrown out the window , espcially in china.

    1. Re:Foriegn courts by Maestro4k · · Score: 1
      • Now if foriegn courts would just be so nice about things such as spam and child pornography.

        Anyone else ever feel like we're getting the raw deal, their complaints tend to get reasonably addressed, but ours tend to get thrown out the window , espcially in china.

      With spam this is true, but as far as child porn it's not. China's gone one further and made all porn illegal online at least. I remember an article, posted on /. I think, recently telling how China was cracking down on those who viewed porn online by arresting them.
  20. Red dragon chip? by isny · · Score: 1

    What about the Red Dragon chip? As far as I can tell, it's vaporware. Last news I heard was from about June 2004.
    Course, I could be wrong. I mean it could be running Duke Nukem as we speak.

  21. China Rules! by kin242 · · Score: 1

    Go China I say!!! They make great DVD players which arent burdened with intrusive region-coding crapware!

    --
    kin242.net
  22. Video Game question by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

    If the Chinese companies win, will we see the PlayStation 2 and Xbox prices drop to those of the GameCube?

    1. Re:Video Game question by tempmpi · · Score: 1

      Well, Sony is part of the 3C group, so they either get their license fees for the ps2 back or don't pay the full amount from the start and there are no DVD patent charges on the xbox, you pay them when you buy the remote. (One reason why the third party remotes have no trouble being a lot cheaper than the original, they just don't pay these fees.)
      So very likely the reason why the XBox is at $150 is that it is selling enough at that price, it is expensive to make and Microsoft doesn't want to lose more on hardware sales than needed. The PS2 should be pretty cheap to make, it is almost 2 years older than Gamecube and XBox and built quality is clearly not as good as their competitors. The reason why the PS2 is at $150 is that they are dominating the market and still selling more than Microsoft and Nintendo. I think the PS2 is going to drop to $100 after the XBox 2/Next/whatever launch.

      --
      Jan
    2. Re:Video Game question by aostanin · · Score: 1

      The Playstation 2 price might drop, but I don't think the Xbox will. Microsoft puts those licensing costs into the Xbox DVD remote controls, which you need to enable DVD watching. So, maybe the remote controls will cost less.

  23. In Communist China.... by UnHolier+than+ever · · Score: 1

    It is now a crime to conspire to monopolize??? Isn't it the whole point of communist economic policy in the firstplace? A communist revolution is after all one big conspiracy to monopolize, with the belief that it creates a better world!

  24. Pioneer is NOT a US company by Animats · · Score: 1

    Pioneer's corporate headquarters is at 1-4-1 Meguro, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 153-8654, Japan. Its president is Kaneo Ito. Main plants are in Tokyo and Saitama prefectures. Production is being moved to plants in Southern China.

  25. China should conspire and fuck them over. by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

    Ok go China! but what I don't understand is why more manufactures don't make un-licensed DVD players? Just because something doesn't have the 'DVD' logo on the front doesn't mean people won't buy it, especially if their friends buy it and ok it and especially if it costs bloody 50% less than a normal player! Chinese manufacturers could wipe the market - at least in china, and the demand for these players everywhere else would be enormous - surely customs/governments could be COUGH persuaded into diverting attention eh? like they did with the DMCA. China makes just about everything so if the 3DICKS don't like it they can go to hell, I want my cheap DVD players!!

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  26. China Syndrome by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    If the DVD cartel doesn't work this out, we'll all get screwed when the Chinese Central Mafia Committee declares that good Communists use only the official Chinese (royalty-free) competitor to DVD. And decline to prosecute DVD pirates.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:China Syndrome by 0x000000 · · Score: 1

      This would IMHO kill off the entire american industry, and force them to come up with a new system which the chinese accept.

      --
      cat /dev/null > .signature
    2. Re:China Syndrome by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Of course, this setup is exactly what America did to England through piracy and patent/copyright laws. Though England's IP industry was hardly killed off, it was completely dwarfed by America's. With 21st Century globalism, the competition will be much fiercer. We really are in bad shape when our own industries are putting themselves, and we consumers, that much under the influence of the Chinese mafia government.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    3. Re:China Syndrome by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Yep, the whole deck is stacked against us. It's not a competition between homegrown fascism and foreign, it's them against the people.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  27. Are these the patents? by Woy · · Score: 1

    DVD player makers from China are suing the 3C DVD Patent Group over royalties on patents held by the consortium. The suit accuses 3C alliance for

    - price-fixing,
    - unlawful tying of essential and non-essential patents together,
    - group boycott and conspiracy to monopolize.

    Are these the patents they are refering to?

    --
    "If God created us in his own image we have more than reciprocated." - Voltaire
  28. Re:screw DVDs... look at Ceren instead! by jack_call · · Score: 1

    damn I finally got mod points, and then there's no '-1 idiot'

    --
    This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine. My sig is my best friend. It is my life.
  29. Takings clause by tepples · · Score: 1

    Nor would you need to ammend the constitution to abolish copyrights.

    Some have claimed that the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment ("nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation") prohibits abolishing or abridging copyrights in existing works or patents in existing inventions unless the federal government buys the copyrights or patents at market price and PDs them. James v. Campbell, 104 U.S. 356 (1881).

    1. Re:Takings clause by AJWM · · Score: 1

      If the gov't really wanted to abolish copyrights and/or patents (unlikely in the extreme), I think the "without just compensation" clause could be met by simply refunding the application fees. Beyond that, the gov't is simply "taking" back what they granted in the first place: a promise to use govt force if necessary to ensure the author's/inventor's temporary monopoly. That's not exactly "private property", and is why the term "intellectual property" is oxymoronic on its face.

      --
      -- Alastair
    2. Re:Takings clause by Dizzle · · Score: 1

      Supposing they only gave out one quarter for every patent the country would go bankrupt. There are an awful lot of patents out there.

      --
      -Dizzle
      "I most likely AM so interested in myself."
    3. Re:Takings clause by Znork · · Score: 1

      Patents and copyright are not private property. They're a government granted temporary monopoly. By definition the concepts of copyright and patents themselves take private property by reducing natural property rights, and by prohibiting people from realizing the fruits of their own labor.

      The powers given do not come out of thin air. What the copyright owners and patent owners are granted is taken from everyone else. And frankly I dont see we get much compensation for that these days.

    4. Re:Takings clause by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Yes, an interesting point.

      First let me make a lesser non-contestable point. The government could abolish copyrights and patents at least in terms of terminating any grant of new ones.

      As for existing ones, your link makes a good point but I think it was signifigantly linked to the circumstances. It was in terms of maintaining current law and that the government was not exempt from the existing structure. I would like to point out that some portions of copy rights have at times been "diminished" or "taken away" by new law, and that existing copyright holders did not need to be compensated for that "taking". There are many examples of theis, but the first that comes to mind is section 117 of copyright law. It says that installing a copy of software onto a harddrive is not infringment, nor is loading a copy into memory. It was a pretty stupid ruling, but MAI v Peak had establised that copying into RAM was an infringment of existing copy rights.

      So congress has in many many cases removed various bits and peices of the bundle of rights granted to copyright holders, and has never paid a single cent to existing copyright holders for doing so.

      I think a case of congress activly choosing to alter the nature of copyrights would be very different than some vandom government entity simply trying to appropriate copyrights and patents for itself. The latter would violate the rights copyrightholders and patentholders were given and still have.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    5. Re:Takings clause by AJWM · · Score: 1

      Less than seven million. I hardly think that giving out less than $2 million would bankrupt the country. And of course, most of those patents have expired.

      --
      -- Alastair
  30. The Intellectual Property Law of China by westlake · · Score: 1
    I have made this suggestion before, but it will bear repeating.

    This should be required reading before posting on IP law and China: Ministry of Science and Technology: Laws and Regulations

    In Emglish translation:

    The Patent Law of the People's Republic of China
    Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China
    Coyright Law of the People's Republic of China
    Technology Contract Law of the People's Republic of China
    Product Quality Law of the People's Republic of China

  31. Chinese companies can't export infringing players by tepples · · Score: 1

    Ok go China! but what I don't understand is why more manufactures don't make un-licensed DVD players?

    The customs departments of North American and European companies would stop patent-infringing players at the border.

  32. Laugh Riot by Detritus · · Score: 1
    I can't help thinking that they are going to get laughed out of court by the judge. Their suit presumes a bunch of "rights" that I've never heard of. If I'm a patent holder, I can be a total bastard about licensing the patent. If the prospective licensees don't like it, too bad.

    The article assumes that Chinese DVD makers are paying licensing fees on their current products. I've read that many don't pay or are way behind in their payments. That's part of the reason that their products are so cheap.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  33. law stuff of HK is independent by cyfer2000 · · Score: 1

    So the second example is not really related with the common entity of China.

    --
    There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
  34. O snap by kronchev · · Score: 1

    This is like the mafia suing the MPAA/RIAA/any other business consortium. Theyre the only ones with the balls and the resources to take them on. This is going to be FUN to watch.

  35. This May Be by dmarx · · Score: 1

    The first time that Chinese haven't just pirated what they couldn't afford. ;-)

    --
    "Do I dare disturb the universe?"
  36. It is about money, not freedom China cares about by wenzi · · Score: 1

    http://www.dvd-recordable.org/Article1734.phtml

    Because they are not paying fees, the DVD group is shutting them out of the US and Europe and lots of their factories are going away.

    --
    -- I doubt, therefore I might be.
  37. China's been batting 1.000 lately by Corellon+Larethian · · Score: 1

    It's a bit wierd, too. I grew up with the whole Chairman of the Board Mao/Better-dead-than-Red thing. But since about 1995, China's been making some really good calls here and there. Honestly, I think they're going to end up surpassing America in both technological advancement, and social stability.

    1. Re:China's been batting 1.000 lately by KD5YPT · · Score: 1

      Technological advancement surpassing America. Perhaps, but the general mindset isn't helping in China (Taiwan would help, if China change their policy, Taiwan will re-join China. At least that's what my family in Taiwan are saying).
      But speaking from experience, especially those from my relatives in China... social stability will take a LONG while before it stablize (the only stability are from general submission to government and military).

      --
      In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
  38. Excellent news by Legion303 · · Score: 1

    Content control disturbs me enough to re-flash my DVD drives with hacked firmware to kill region encoding, even though all my DVDs are Region 1. Why should I be limited to a small number of region changes on equipment I've BOUGHT and that I OWN OUTRIGHT and even (in some places) PAY EXTRA MONEY FOR because of "piracy tax"? Anything at all that messes with the content cartels makes me extremely happy. I hope they fucking burn.

  39. Re:Slitty Eyed Gooks! by wigger_mn · · Score: 1

    what do you mean no idiot ? It's a bit wierd, too. I grew up with the whole Chairman of the Board Mao/Better-dead-than-Red thing. But since about 1995, China's been making some really good calls here and there. Honestly, I think they're going to end up surpassing America in both technological advancement, and social stability.

  40. Counterbalanced within a bill by tepples · · Score: 1

    I would like to point out that some portions of copy rights have at times been "diminished" or "taken away" by new law, and that existing copyright holders did not need to be compensated for that "taking". ... So congress has in many many cases removed various bits and peices of the bundle of rights granted to copyright holders, and has never paid a single cent to existing copyright holders for doing so.

    When Congress has taken away rights under copyright law, it has tended to compensate copyright owners by granting them other rights in the same bill. For example, you mention 17 USC 117. The changes made to 17 USC 117 in October 1998, specifically intended to keep another MAI v. Peak from happening, were counterbalanced with the rest of the DMCA. Likewise, the "Fairness in Music Licensing Act" passed around the same time, which gave restaurants and bars the right to turn on the radio without making a separate payment to BMI, ASCAP, and SESAC, was counterbalanced with a copyright term extension.

    1. Re:Counterbalanced within a bill by Alsee · · Score: 1

      tended to compensate copyright owners by granting them other rights in the same bill

      Hmmm.... interesting theory. I'm not sure if there are any exceptions. However I'd wager that's purely artifact of the fact of constantly expanding copyright rather than by design. Chuckle.

      Especially as how the only valid purpose for which congress may grant such rights is for the purpose of promoting progress. If congress is going to make some change that happens to "diminish" copyrights they can't simply decide to seize some random rights from the public to make a "payment" to existing copyright holders, and they can't necessarily just sit around holding off on that law until they have some needed "increase" to roll into a single bill as a bogus "payment" rather than passing two genuinely independant bills. I really don't think the government is obligated to start passing out cash payments to every single copyright holder (meaning everyone over the age of 2) simply because a "decrease" for the purpose of promoting progress is passed independantly from any "increase" for the purpose of promoting progress.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  41. Re:Slitty Eyed Gooks! by Borderlinebass · · Score: 1

    In most ways, right down to average lifespan, China has already blown the doors off of India, a Democratic nation that began industrialization at the same time.

    Google will turn up the relevant Quality of Life Indicator data.

    --
    Fight for something better: www.socialistalternative.org
  42. & Vietnam too by DABANSHEE · · Score: 1

    China attacked Vietnam about 20 years ago.

    Still his point still stands - you know that the US has been invoved in a average of one war a year since it's foundation, most of which the US started.

    Incidently the US has higher incarceration rates & executes more people per capita than China.