Slashdot Mirror
Copyright Issues in the Mainstream
dmayle writes "Recently, the Supreme Court of the U.S. ruled on a momentous topic, the Grokster case (as covered on Slashdot). It turns out, however, it's not just geeks who are taking notice, and we're not the only ones who think things are getting ridiculous. The Economist has a great story on the subject, noting among other things, that if the cost of publishing had come down with the internet, perhaps the amount of protection needed to encourage publishing is less as well." From the article: "Both the entertainment and technology industries have legitimate arguments. Media firms should be able to protect their copyrights. And without any copyright protection of digital content, they may be correct that new high quality content is likely to dry up (along with much of their business). Yet tech and electronics firms are also correct that holding back new technology, merely because it interferes with media firms' established business models, stifles innovation and is an unjustified restraint of commerce."
The problem, to some extent extent, thus perhaps lies with the quality of content.
Unfortunately, I'd say it's the quality of the code too. Recently (past few months), Slashdot has been going down more than a cheap Las Vegas hooker (no offense intended to any cheap Las Vegas hookers who may read Slashdot).
I don't respond to AC's.
Yeah, but advertisements for Sony's beta recorder specifically claimed you could use it to record over the air programming! Thus, Sony showed an intent for users to violate copyrights.
What has changed? Why was it fair use when Sony did it but illegal when Grokster does it?
And the whole "intent" standard leads to fear. Did the engineer behind the copy machine have an intent? Did the creator of the printing press? Did engineer who created the first CD burner?
And here's the real problem: Who determines intent? A judge or jury at trial. Thus, you could have NO intent to have users infringe, but you still have to go through a trial, spend a lot of money, and risk losing to protect your new technology.
The only companies capable of doing such a thing would have deep pockets but would also have no desire of upsetting the status quo. Both Intel and Microsoft have been courting the content industries, not antagonizing them.
And besides, innovative technology rarely comes from the status quo, but from smaller companies.
Basically, the Grokster is going to kill more innovation than even software patents!
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.