Slashdot Mirror
Legalize File Sharing, Say Swedish MPs
CrystalFalcon writes "In the past week, the file sharing debate has exploded in Sweden, with numerous mainstream politicians finally having understood the issue. Last week, seven Swedish MPs wrote a prominent opinion piece saying that fully legalized file sharing is not just the best solution, it's the only solution. Now their number has increased to 13, and the issue continues to grow. Good summaries at TorrentFreak and P2P Consortium. Original opinion piece in English here."
There's no emoticon for what I'm feeling.
My 0.02 cents
I hereby propose that Sweden be henceforth known as "Benderia".
"Last week, seven Swedish MPs wrote a prominent opinion piece saying that fully legalized file sharing is not just the best solution, it's the only solution."
And just how much Swedish "culture" is their on piratebay?
cuz i may dye my hair blonde and buy me a ticket !!
Read radical news here
emigrate to Sweden? Man, not only they make the best pr0n, now they will (hopefully) legalize file-sharing...
Where is that guy who'd die defending what I had to say when I need him?
I'm very proud to live in the Sweden now. Proud of the nation of Pirates! So if you mpaa or riaa are planing to invande Sweden, think again! We will fight to the last man. Yarr!
Actually they recently criminalized _buying_ sexual services. Selling therm is still legal, though.
sudo ergo sum
While I think NO penalties for ignoring copyright infringement is a bad idea, I also think that suing 12yr olds is even more retarded. The benefits of this idea are that time/money/lives aren't lost and/or ruined by overly greedy corporations. However, I don't think the artists/creators will enjoy this much. But I think we can all agree, those that want to infringe will, regardless of the laws.
After all, in a democratic country, if a very large percentage of the population willingly infringes a law, there is a very strong case that the law is wrong, not the people. So I guess in any (truly) democratic country file-sharing and similar attitudes regarding "intellectual property" should be legal.
Where is that guy who'd die defending what I had to say when I need him?
You know there is only one way this will end. Within a year of Sweden legalizing file sharing, the MAFIAA with have put enough pressure on all the North American ISPs to block any connection resolving to a Swedish address. Problem solved.
I have to say, getting EU citizenship is looking more appealing all the time.
It would be really interesting to know what percentage of computer users share files...? In my informal surveys, the figure is really high, 80-90%, and the people who do not share files don't do it simply because they don't care, or don't know how.
I have never, once, found someone who actually states that they have a moral principle against it.
The whole "piracy is theft" campaign seems as empty as the "don't smoke pot" campaign. People will do it, and just find ways of not getting caught.
My blog
It seems that any actual societal progress comes from Europe these days, while the US is sinking deeper into a Republican/corporate mire. This is just another example.
That's not Picasso, that's Kandinsky!
Anyone else think that some one at the media forgot to pay swedish politicians? Don't worry, it will soon be corrected when the politicians all of sudden find they aren't invited to any media social events.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I'm sorry, but your statement has no basis in fact. Sweden is the world's third largest exporter of music.
"Politicians who play for the antipiracy team should be aware that they have allied themselves with a special interest that is never satisfied and that will always demand that we take additional steps toward the ultimate control state."
It boggles my mind that there aren't more politicians who have figured out this gem of wisdom. Restricting the rights and freedoms OF YOUR VOTERS for the benefit of a corporation or trade organization, who will never be happy and will continue to push for more and more restrictions and limitations, is a sure way to decrease your chances of being re-elected...
It would be handy if people posting responses to this could indicate if they have ever created anything from which they gained a financial return due to copyright laws. I write stuff and generate income from the fact that the law gives me the right to control its copying in return for money. If that law is repealed I will find other ways to spend my time/earn money. I suspect other people will feel and act in the same way. Of course some people will do it for the love of it. Me I quite like going to folk clubs where people do it for the love of the art. Not sure if that is all the creative content I want in my life though.
Please re-seed. I'm stuck at 67%.
Well, thanks to the Internet, I'm now bored with sex.
That's wrong, Sweden produce, percentage, most international music of all countries in the world. Why Sweden is in the front of the filesharing debate is because we have the highest internet and computer use in the world. Every home in Sweden have at the worst a ADSL-link connected.
FTA:
That's not the same as the synopsis:
Now, I RTFA and it reads to me that he feels that the media/IP industries will never be satisfied with what the state does and that he doesn't feel it's the states place to police the Internet. Both of these are admirable and sensible statements, in line with what many people actually think.
But I really don't think he is advocating Sweden as some sort of torrent haven as some posters seem to be suggesting.
A thistle is a fat salad for an ass's mouth...
That's just not true. I live in Sweden, and prostitution is very much illegal. You must be thinking of the Netherlands or something.
I tried to purchase "intimate services" just a couple of months ago, and the only people who would offer it were Chinese immigrants (nothing wrong with that, I like asians) - and only under extreme secrecy.
Again, please remember that Europe isn't one big Eastern equivalent of the US - the countries in Europe are very diverse and have very different laws. And no, Sweden and Switzerland aren't the same country.
have balls enough to come to the same conclusion?
Also here:
http://www.p2p-zone.com/underground/showthread.php?t=24395/
- js.
"That's how democracy works. Or at least, how it's supposed to work."
Oh that's fine and dandy. That however doesn't imply that the decision (especially of crowds) are wise one's. History has far too many examples of crowd wisdom being not only wrong, but with deadly consequences (especially for the minority).
...But I think we can all agree, those that want to infringe will, regardless of the laws. The limit of law is that which can be achieved by voluntary compliance of the most of the citizens. To criminalize a vast segment of the population is simply bad legislation. Prohibition is the textbook example.The key is to do it all reeaaallllyyyyy ssssssllllllloooooooowwwwwwwwwllllllllllyyyyyyyyyyy.
sudo ergo sum
So yes, it would be a net gain. There would be at least one country in the world that values its citizen's privacy.
Wouldn't the Berne Convention make it hard for Sweden to implement this?
I guess they could always withdraw from the Convention, but almost certainly not without international political consequences.
I agree, but not only because there are so many people pirating, but simply because this is the right thing to do. It's not about pirating or saving a few bucks: one of the primary reasons for the existence of nations is to contribute to the diffusion and development of culture (I live in Italy and here we have this clearly written in one of the first articles of our constitution; the proposed European constitution says pretty much the same thing).
Copyright was established as a state-created monopoly, for a limited time, to encourage the creation and diffusion of artistic works. Not to guarantee an endless stream of money to the MAFIAA lawyers. It's pretty clear that the creation and diffusion of art, music, movies, books, etc. is doing pretty well today (probably better than any other period in human history!) despite, and sometimes thanks to, the huge diffusion of filesharing and piracy.
So there's no need to outlaw it. It's that simple: copyright isn't a law of nature, it was accepted as a compromise to achieve an end and can be changed if necessary.
There's a hidden treasure in Python 3.x: __prepare__()
Um, mods? Can we get a -1 TimeCube over here? Thanks.
The creator of this post (Jacob Smith) hereby releases it, and all of his other posts, into the public domain.
"...little IP..."
Ahrem... just because the country barely has 9 million people doesn't mean they have little IP. The cool thing with Sweden is that it has IP where it matters and LOADS of it.
ABB, Ericsson, Tetra Laval... I could go on.
That you got 5 mod points is insulting.
I gotta say can swedish servers cope if this was to happen and what about the simple rule of not putting all your eggs in one basket? If all the file sharers move to sweden then we know where to find them. I think it's good for them to make a stand but will they lead the way or get globally net banned???
Not an identical argument, but good and relevant nonetheless is Lessig's TED Talk on creativity versus law http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/187
If you're half as beautiful naked, you'd be 4 times as beautiful with twice as many clothes on.
is it you?
(only meaningful to readers of El Reg)
I think you'll find that Sweden has a HUGE number of companies that generate considerably more patents (and therefore IP) per capita than the US
source: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_pat_gra_percap-economy-patents-granted-per-capita
Keep scrolling down, past Latvia... and Mongolia... and Kazakhstan... and you find the US in 40th position.
Now admittedly, you're actually talking about copyright IP, pertaining (mainly) to music and video which can be easily packaged up electronically and transmitted without authorisation. Might be a good idea to have stated that.
Beer Coat: The invisible but warm coat worn when walking home after a booze cruise at 3 in the morning.
to the Swedish anyway.
I have excellent Karma and I am not afraid to Troll it.
Uhm, wasn't it the other way around?
Not to mention Håkan Lans, the inventor of a key technology used in colour computer graphics among other things, for all the good the patent system did him.
You mean SonyEricsson. Nokia are Finnish.
As much as I would love to see this go through, the numbers make this look like a fringe movement to me. There are 349 members of the Riksdag (Swedish Parliament) and the article says only 13 MPs have come out in favor of this. Even though this originated from a member of the leading party, it is still a long ways from becoming more than rhetoric.
I'll definitely be keeping my eyes open for updates on this, though.
I do not earn money from copyright laws, but that is not the point. You see, The media industry is ripping of you too.
A CD here in stockholm cost more or less 150 SEK, of that about 10 SEK go to the copyright holders. If I want to buy a song online, the price at www.ahlens.se is 12.90 SEK.
From that I can easily see that although the distribution-cost practically has vanished, the media industry still want the same price for the music. They are ripping us of. A fair price for an album would be 30 SEK, 10 SEK for the distributor and 20 SEK for the artist. And a fair price for a song would be 3 SEK.
The problem with the copyright law is that it allow these abuses, and it enables the media industry to undermine our integrity and rights society through spending vasts amount on lobbying.
That is why copyright is Evil.
"In free countries it is not normal to punish civilians for ignoring the petty crimes of their fellow citizens."
That's assuming that there are petty crimes and hence petty consequences.
I suggest you read this.
It moved me to tears...of laughter
Actually you immigrate to a country, emigrating implies going FROM a country. Use it correctly and the women flock around you at parties.
I don't know what the original report "proposing to close down file sharers' Internet connections" entailed, but that description sounds overly broad. Does it cover any file sharing whatsoever, any sharing specifically on P2P networks, or sharing files specifically identified as infringing copyrighted material?
The last time I used P2P (bittorrent), it was for downloading Fedora Core DVD's. If someone shut down my Internet connection for doing that, I would be *pissed*!
In my experience the figure is pretty low - more like 10-20% of the people I know. I believe that file-sharing has a particular demographic, and outside of that, people can't be bothered with that computer thingy.
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
> Just saying that a majority doesn't necessarily define what is right and wrong.
For all practical purposes, might makes right.
The existence of rights independent on people who believe in them is a very interesting concept for philosophy classes, but devoid of real world applications.
ABB, Ericsson and so on don't produce any IP that can be infringed with file sharing, so it's a useless comparison.
What I'd like to know - how much retail software does Sweden export? What is the size of its movie export industry? What about its gaming industry?
If Sweden want to legalize file sharing of stuff they produce, that's fine by me. But if they try and legalize file sharing of stuff other people produce, you have a WIPO violation on your hands, not to mention a policy that is blatantly unfair.
I would like to point out that file sharing is legal, always has been legal, and always will be legal. Copyright infringement, however, is not.
Saying that file sharing is illegal is like saying that the snail mail system is illegal, because it can be used to distribute copyrighted material illegally. This is giving the file sharing technology a bad reputation, which is bad for obvious reasons - it can be used for many other things besides copyright infringement.
-Enfors-
WMD? What's that? Wiser Music Distribution?
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
No. Selling sexual services is legal, buying them isn't.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
This isn't literally true, of course, but it is closer to the truth than most people seem to think.
I don't think thats correct. I found this on a web page:
"Sweden's popular music has been so successful it has become an important export product, making Sweden by some counts the world's third biggest exporter of music."
"Net gain" would mean that somehow the Swedish government makes money from the transfer of copyrighted material, I don't think thats true either, though one could argue the Swedish population would gain an advantage over people in countries with tighter restrictions.
So sending a CAD/CAM file or VHDL design or any other file that contains IP does not infringe on any IP... common... its not all about Music, Film and the arts you know.
that is not even legally publishable due to copyright law. Frankly, I'm tired of you benefiting at my expense.
Tastes differ and all that, but either I've missed a major development, or you're confused. I've never seen any swedish porn that's been even passable, let alone good. The very few swedish porn "starlets" we have are way _below_ the average in looks for girls in their age range, which is also pretty damn strange. Girls here are on average VERY pretty - but none of the actually good looking ones actually take the porn career path. It's a bummer.
The second text, signed by 13 MPs, is available in English here at the main author's blog. It's mostly a reply to another piece by the copyright lobbying organisations and the secretary of the Swedish Academy, so it may be a bit confusing if you haven't read that one (which only seems to be available in Swedish here).
bork bork bork!
Actually it is true. Buying sex is illegal here, as is beeing a pimp, but the prostitutes themselves aren't doing anything illegal.
Selling yourself is legal, but buying and "pimping" is not.
OTOH, you could argue that for music, most of the money will shift to live concerts, and for gaming, most of the money will shift to on-line gaming. This would mean that a not unlikely future would create huge problems for the movie industry (where Sweden has little to lose) but less problems for the areas where Sweden is comparatively strong.
That would be overthinking the issue from the point of view of the MP's. They just argue that civil liberties are more important than copyright infringements, and that's that. Quite reasonable, IMHO.
Actually you write it grammar, grammer implies you don't know how to spell. Use it correctly and...well, women won't flock around you at parties, but English teachers will be less inclined to hit you with bricks.
Yes that's how democracy works. This however neglects to address the moral issues involved. What if a majority of the population wanted it to imprison a minority? Let's say the Swedes decided all of their problems were caused by the Norwegians. Just because a majority of the population wants something, doesn't make it right to do it.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for open information sharing, but the argument above points out the flaws in the idea of "it's democratic so it must be ok."
ofcourse, this is complete BS, there are alot of companies that produce stuff, like IKEA, Sandvik, Bofors, SAAB and so on.. and you can be pretty sure that they patent their ideas.
i find your lack of faith in science disturbing!
Money for nothing, pix for free
They say information is the enemy of ignorance. Maybe you should try a dose. This time, I've done some of the work for you:
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden#Economy:
"Sweden is an export-oriented market economy featuring a modern distribution system, excellent internal and external communications, and a skilled labour force. [...] Telecommunications, the automotive industry and the pharmaceutical industries are also of great importance. Agriculture accounts for 2 percent of GDP and employment.
[...]
Sweden is ranked as having the best creativity in Europe for business and is predicted to become a talent magnet for the world's most purposeful workers. [...]"
All the typical signs of a post-industrial economy which relies quite heavily on copyright, patent and trademark laws.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
God, I hate pseudo-arguments like this; taking one aspect of the argument and spinning it, but ok, I'll bite
a) worked on many different TV shows
b) worked for a record company
c) have a couple of patents
and d) I write.
Of course, you'd know of d alrady - I wrote the piece for TorrentFreak.
The point of the pieces through, isn't abolishing copyright, returning to anarchy, but instead that attempting to criminalise a large section of the population, because an industry hasn't moved on, nor learned from past attempts (with the VCR and MP3 players specifically mentioned).
I just hope your writing is a damned sight better than your reading comprehension.
http://www.torrentfreak.com
http://neuron2neuron.blogspot.com
http://www.piracyisnotacrime.com
Seems like exactly my point. You don't create and you don't want to pay for other peoples creative content. So you think the media industry is ripping you off. Shop around, changes in technology are making it easier and easier for people who create to sell directly. My friends produce music CD's most of the price goes into their pockets, most of the payment from my writing (80% ish) goes into my poket. If you cannot be bothered to look further than major record lables that is no reason to repeal the entire legal structure of copyright.
He's talking about important IP creations like amazon's one click pattent. You know, the stuff that makes the US a world leader in IP crap.
Try the hundreds of heavy metal bands in Sweden, many of which also come to the states to tour. Sweden most likely exports the greatest amount of metal, of any European country. Opeth, for example, is now certainly one of the most highly acclaimed metal bands in the world.
Systemd: the PulseAudio of init systems
So you gain from copyright, fine. not a problem. Where the problem occurs is that for the next 100 years after your death the corporations involve still gain and still rip off your hiers. Not to mention if your work has been making them lots of money they will attempt to extend the copyright near the end of the 100 years ... example Disney Co.. successfully got the copyright on Mickey Mouse upped from 50 to 100 years by convincing the American Congress that Disney without a copyright in Mickey Mouse would some how kill the company and probably "endanger" children by allowing misuse of said copyright.
The media companies need to revamp their marketing to take advantage of the new error.. not try to circumvent the law to maintain effectively a criminal enterprise.
I was responding to a post that included "The problem with the copyright law", so I figured the person had a problem with copyright law. You may not be against the abolition of copyright law but many comentators are.
Who says I dont pay?
It is my freedom that they are stealing, with the legal structure of copyright as an excuse. I am not saying that they should take away protection from copyright-holders, I am saying that copyright law is being abused and it has to change.
It is interesting to point out that this is an opinion piece from members of the rightmost party of sweden (in parliament of course)
(I'm not Canadian. It just fits the joke so much better, on multiple levels - with the recently passed Canadian DMCA and all...)
This works on the assumption that I generally assign my copyright to some corporation. Due to the changes in technology I generally don't have to do that. Generally I have come to the conclusion that it is not in my best financial interest. The relationship for most of what I create is between me and the customer with a little bit taken by the payment processor. Look out the window, technology is changing the relationship between those that create and the customer. My friend sell most of their CD's directly to the customer, their audience.
Just because US copyright law has become a pawn of major corporations (I'm not in the US) doesn't mean that copyright itself is a bad thing.
Here in the UK there was a recent fuss about extending copyright for another 25 years. The theory was that the people who created the stuff would be encouraged to create more. The fact that quite a few of them are dead did seem to undermine the argument somewhat.
You have a good point that copyright law are being abused.
Is it the translation, or is this yet another misleading headline? In English, "decriminalize" and "legalize" do not generally mean the same thing. From m-w.com:
decriminalize : to remove or reduce the criminal classification or status of; especially : to repeal a strict ban on while keeping under some form of regulation
The translation of the article said the only solution is to "decriminalize" file-sharing, which may well not mean "make it legal" (per the headline and summary). Anyone here who can read the original and clarify? Or anyone who has insight into the authors' intent?
It makes a difference to me; I'd be happy to have personal, small-scale copyright infringement decriminalized, but that doesn't mean it should be "ok".
The argument that the reason to decriminalize is that the RIAA/MPAA are zealots who will never be satisfied, though... while it has a poetic justice to it, it's really just a variation on slipperly-slope argument and holds no logical weight. That some people would go too far in one direction doesn't mean you should go as far as possible in the opposite direction. It does mean you should be skeptical of what those "some people" ask for, but as to any specific measure, evaluate it on its own merits instead of blaming the idea for the views of those who hold it.
(That said, on its own merits the idea of ISP's being responsible for copyright enforcement is insane and should be thrown out.)
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you actually believe that, but go check out the lack of broadband in many rural areas. When we bought our house in the Swedish countryside we were promised broadband within six months. Eight years later, we were finally able to get ADSL (and even then only at a wildly over-inflated price courtesy of those fine, monopoly-wielding folks at Telia).
Sweden has excellent connectivity in large towns. Elsewhere, it sucks.
In a world where content is created only by those who really enjoy doing it, and not by those who are simply in it for the money, there would be no Britney Spears albums, no Michael Bay movies, and no more anything by Dr. Phil. The Church of Scientology would dry up and disappear due to a shortage of funds and perceived "star power". I am having a very difficult time understanding what is "bad" about any of this.
Seems kind of hypocritical.. do the police just enjoy giggling at the hookers then busting anyone that approaches one
which is totally what she said
If we simply got rid of copyright laws and made all content public domain (as many here advocate), how many of this site's readers would lose their jobs?
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
I fail to see how it's the copyright law that is letting artists get screwed over by the recording labels, I thought it would be more to do with the fact that musicians don't tend to have a degree in business management or economics, and therefor let themselves get screwed over.
which is totally what she said
Sounds you were unlucky. The latest report from PTS (the Swedish post and telecommunications board) says that 97% of all phone connections offer *DSL.
Prostitution is a funny case. Often, the "seller" is in a position of peculiar weakness compared to the "buyer" and "broker" (pimp). If buying and broking is illegal but selling isn't, then the prostitute has immunity from prosecution, giving him/her a great deal of negotiating power they wouldn't normally have.
Now here's my perspective:
I have not created anything that I have been paid for, but that is not for lack of trying. I have wanted to create comic books since the 1970s.
To get the @$$-holes out of the way, let's just agree to say that my work sucks and is not worth publishing. There, now we can probably discuss this as adults. :)
Here is the situation after a few decades:
I was NOT willing to travel to New York to work for slave wages in the offices of Marvel or DC; therefore, I stayed in sunny California, got a real job that paid my bills and allowed me time to work on my "hobby".
After several decades I have a decent retirement account built up, I have had paid vacations, sick-time (that I have periodically abused), a real career, regular decent pay checks that have enabled me to buy a very large house in the not-cheap San Francisco Bay Area. I still work on my "hobby". I hope to one day publish my work.
On the flip side, I hear horror stories of some of the comic creators whose work I enjoyed as a child not having basic medical care in the older years. Some live in poverty!
True, a few have made out like bandits, notably the Image comics guys (they were all guys, weren't they?). By and large though, I seem to be better off NOT having "succeeded". I get a chill trying to imagine my life if I had gone to work for Marvel of DC in the seventies or eighties.
Copyright law did not protect the creators of my youth! In fact, the "Work For Hire" provisions FUCKED OVER people I admire and respect!
I do NOT want to eliminate copyright, I just want FUCKING POLITICIANS to remember that copyright is a benefit We the People grant to creators for a temporary time, not for FUCKIN' ETERNITY!
We have always been at war with Eurasia!
Wait... is file sharing illegal in Sweden? I didn't know any governments that ban file sharing. I share files all the time with people via my web site, email, IM, FTP, and bittorrent. In the U.S. none of these things are illegal. However, in most countries, copyright infringement is illegal. It sounds to me like the entire article confuses the terms "file sharing" with "copyright infringement" which sounds like a form of doublespeak to me.
Now that it is solved, how much longer until we get `musik.ikea.com`? The only problem is there most likley won't be a search function and you'll have to travese a directory tree yourself to find anything.
Forgive my spelling from time to time. I'm often posting during short breaks.
Sorry, but that's pretty much completely untrue. Sweden has a strict drug policy and laws against buying sex.
Actually he did mean Nokia. You see Finland is just rebellious province of Sweden, lost for temporarily, but not permanently. No truly Swedish have never accepted the loss of the empire. As the time will come right the Stormaktstiden will come back! The rightful lands of Finland, Norway, Estonia and parts of Russia and North-Germany will be returned under the reborn Swedish Empire!
Survey research tool for commercial and scientific use
The real difference between Europe and the U.S.of A.
All I can say is "vive la difference!"
Other copies, in case of slashdotting ...
here and here
Kevin Smith on Prince
So who forces you to boy all those 150 SKK CD's
If you do not like being abused by the record companies, then just don't support them by buying their products.
Things have certainly improved, all give you that. But 97% is not *all*, which is what the original post claimed.
Picky me aside, I find myself wondering if someone is pulling the wool over PTS' eyes (which wouldn't be the first time a regulator was wrong-footed by a crafty telco). In particular, I note that the report says that 97% of phone lines are connected to an exchange which is ADSL enabled. That's not quite the same as saying 97% of phone lines can have ADSL if they choose to do so. When Telia first put a dslam into our exchange it was 20-port model. With some 200 households on the exchange, you can guess how quickly those 20 ports were filled. Despite being on a waiting list for 7 years at that point, we had to wait a further year for Telia to fit a larger dslam and provide us with service.
The last I heard, Telia was threatening to cease rolling out new dslam installations, in a fit of pique over PTS' legal victory forcing Telia to share its equipment with other ISPs. So the remaining 3% (or more, if my suspicion is correct) might have a long wait.
If Swedish citizens can freely copy and distribute intellectual property created by other people in the world without paying for it, the only natural response is that people of any other nation are able to freely distribute Swedish intellectual property. This means any form of technology or design created by Swedes - including your friendly neighbourhood IKEA branded store with IKEA branded furniture created by IKEA paid designers.
While the individual probability that a given customer would have purchased a given media instead of downloaded it can be debated by statisticians, it is highly doubtful that a legalization of nonprofit copyright infringement would not deprive rights holders of some amount of money X, where X is greater than 1 Swedish Kroner. Collective theft or deprivement by other nations is retaliated by theft from their nation. As established, to the applause of Slashdotters, by the WTO in the case of Antigua vs the US.
Given how much Hollywood and pop music industry profits from anti police-state motifs, one would imagine it their duty not to suggest, promote, and force the bringing about of a police-states, but that's the beauty of capitalism, by repressing the misfits on both ends of the spectrum, you create a ever more uniform herd, then you give them the idea that what they're buying is not a CD or a DVD but a political statement, of the rebellion they can fell but not grasp, and boom, surging profits.
If the movie and music industries are hemorrhaging, let them die, I cannot conceive why a pop musician and their extended network of facilitators and promoters should led a life with more pomp then a scholar. They who rave about the versatility and dynamism of capitalism, it is time to adapt, it is time to liquidate yours assets, sell the equipment to your money engorged artists, and branch out into hardware or electricity, or hell, take your dozens of millions and let a life worth leading, give a change to those unable to initially buy into success.
We would all be better off with an increased number of local artists, and perhaps the ability of being one of such local artists ourselves.
But I was probably dropped when an infant. They will make ours nation Senates and Congress into brothels, buy our privacy, institute a police state, buy our attention, our schools, our education, and soon enough force us to attend movie theaters more frequently, buy subsequent DVDs more often, and listen to wider variety of pop music. The problem with taking an immoral path, is the immorality of the entirety of the path.
seven Swedish MPs?
Dude... that's mp3 x 2 +1. No wonder they want their mp3s to be free.
I haven't seeen anything he's written aside from the comment, but the comment wasn't very well written. Perhaps he's blaming "pirates" for not his not being able to sell his poor writing?
-mcgrew
Disclaimer: I write for free. If you don't like my stuff, your money is happily refunded. Also I'm untrained, somewhat like a dog who pisses on the floor.
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
Beer Coat: The invisible but warm coat worn when walking home after a booze cruise at 3 in the morning.
off topic: anyone know of any country w/ liberal interpretation of fair use? basically i wanna test a product that uses tiny little excerpts of music, lyrics reassembled to teach (natural) language.. they're telling if i try it here in mexico i go to jail (worse than usa).. the excerpts are tiny (less that 10%); the use is transformative; the purpose is educational.. whateva.. i need to test this thing commercially but where on earth is there liberal fair use?
are there countries where they'll cream you for even thinking about a new fair use?
* mexico (copyright violation rates with violent crime now)
are there countries with liberal interpretation of fair use? guesses:
* sweden ?
* nederlands ?
* brazil ?
* venezuela?
That they will be issuing licenses for ears. To use your ears, you need to submit a 250EU fee, with a form that attests to their non-commercial use. A proposal is being considered for a 15% reduction in licensing cost for those who can demonstrate the function of only one ear - but of course this will not be extended for commercial licensees of their ears.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Slashdot itself gainse nothing from copyright: the replies are copyright their owners. So if there's any change to ./ it'd be they'd BENEFIT from it.
As to the vast majority of the programmers, their businesses will still need a new way of getting business benefit from their computers. They'll still need the computers up and running. They'll still have to upgrade to the next version of Office. So for the vast majority, no change.
In taking a queue from a great movie (Modified for context):
Q: Is there a problem with our laws?
A: Our laws are perfect.
Q: Then why do people disobey them?
A: Because our laws will only lead to one possible outcome.
Q: What outcome?
A: Revolution.
And that leaves us with today: It's a revolution, starting slowly, one country at a time.
People wont adhere to the laws that confine us. When people view what they do as perfectly natural, perfectly legal, it becomes harder and harder to keep them from doing it. Information *wants* to be free. And all the laws, all the digital locks, all the copyrights in the world will not stop it.
So why not let it be free?
Revolution my friends, mark my words.
Thomas A. Knight
Author of The Time Weaver
Just to put things in perspective, the population of the entire country of Sweden in slightly over 9 million pepople.
The population of New York City alone is slightly over 8 million people.
on the negative side you also have ABBA and Ace of Base. So please, bring your own native music if you go. Don't forget about that, it's not all sunshine in Sweden.
"But this one goes to 11!"
"Put down the Nokia"
Nokia is from Finland, you insensitive clod!
It also skews the business towards maintaining huge copyrights vs finding new material to publish. There is a reason it is called 'The Establishment'
love is just extroverted narcissism
While I like my Lynyrd Skynyrd and ZZ Top I also liked Abba. And, shockingly, I also like Swing music.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I fail to see how it's the copyright law that is letting artists get screwed over by the recording labels
It is not, it is allowing US to get screwed over by the recording labels/Hollywood. Think about it: copyright is very much like a patent in that it grants a monopoly for a limited period of time in order to encourage creativity. The difference is that the "customer" for patent holders are often other firms and it is certainly other firms which have their rights limited most by patents. Now compare the term of a patent (20 years) to the term of copyright (70+ years), where we are the customers and it is us who have our rights limited the most.
I understand that legally copyrights and patents are separate things but conceptually they are very similar. So why is it that we have such huge term lengths for copyrights? If artists can live off their old work for the best part of a century why can't inventors? The main difference to me seems to be the lobbying power of the group whose rights are restricted.
That sort of is what happens with patents (I think, maybe). I remember hearing that companies have to pay fees to the patent office annually to keep their patents.
I am under the impression that there are fees for submitting patents, fees for having a patent granted, and fees for keeping a patent on file. Together, these create lots of incentive for 'the government' ('patent office,' really) to grant patents indiscriminately.
Any additional taxes on 'intellectual property' would simply give the government more incentive to recognize IP 'rights' all over the intellectual map.
Sweden exports a lot of music to Japan, Europe (UK and Germany) and USA. During the 90s it exported more music to Japan then USA or UK. Chinas biggest music/pop star (I don't recall her name) live and and produce all her music in Sweden.
There has been a lot (in relation to Swedens small population) of hits in USA: ABBA, Roxette (The Look, It must have been love (Pretty Woman) etc.), Blue Swede (Hooked on a Feeling), Neneh Sherry (Buffalo Stance), Europe (Final Countdown) etc. But most money is generated in international niche markets, like: heavy metal, jazz, indie pop, electro, choire music, opera etc.
Many American performers have/have had Swedish producers, writers, etc. Including 'N Sync, Backstreet Boys, Madonna and Britney Spears. Many American jazz musicians found a refugee from racial discrimination in Sweden (the only name I recall is Duke Ellington, but there where others), and produced a lot of music with Swedish musicians/writers/producers.
Swedish movie industry was actually bigger then American movie industry during the silent era. In modern time there haven't been many blockbusters. But there are some movies that generate money to Sweden (Ingmar Bergman and Mats Helge Olsson (Ninja Misson etc) has produced a lot of movies that is still popular on DVD and TV).
Swedish writers are very popular in the rest of Scandinavia and Germany (they sell more Swedish detective novells in German then in Sweden). But outside Europe people only seem to know of Astrid Lindgren (Pippi Longstocking), one of the worlds most translated authors.
Swedish companies have bought a lot of IP originating from other countries. For example the novels about (and trade mark of) Conan The Barbarian is owned by a Swedish company.
And don't forget about mobile ringtones. Crazy frog (aka The Annoying Thing) is a Swedish creation.
Filesharing _is_ a crime in Sweden and people have been prosieuted for it
Is file sharing illegal or is it illegal to share files that are copyrighted and the person sharing the file does not have the authority to share it? Under the first one, if I write and produce my own music I can't share it whereas under the second someone else can't share the music I created unless I give them permission to share it.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Oh dear.
Yet another slashdot post where someone tries to lump in anyone who does not want to abolish copyright with satan, on the grounds that some dipshit executive at Disney once tried to do X, Y or Z.
please realise that not all copyright holders support the RIAA, DRM, law suits against kids etc etc. In fact, the VAST majority of us support shorter copyright terms, and a strong support of fair use and format shifting.
However because idiots like the piratebay try to polarize the whole thing as being "you are pro-filesharing or against it", then as someone who produces digital content and has bills to pay, I find myself supporting the RIAA rather than the slashdot groupthink, despite disagreeing with them 99% of the way.
Every time people trot out bullshit like "copyright is all evil and file sharing should be legal" or "information wants to be free", it just makes people campaigning for legitimate copyright reform look like a bunch of children. People do NO good for rational copyright laws by trying to insist that all copyright holders be lumped in with 'teh evil RIAA'.
Frankly any country that wants to abolish copyright (which is what legalizing file-sharing amounts to) should feel free to do it. But people who make a living from selling copyrighted products should feel free to lobby international telcos to cut off access to those entire countries in retaliation. After all, id the swedes think that file sharing is the way forward, let them just share Swedish content, and we will see if they feel better off. Surely they don't want the evil content that has been tainted by copyright which comes from the rest of the world anyway?
DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
Yup, prostitution in the Netherlands is legal. Prostitutes pay taxes and helth insurance companies are oblidged to take them as customers.
Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.
Surely the large IP holders already pay a fee or tax of sorts in that they have to retain representation to protect their IP portfolios?
No, IP holder don't pay a fee or tax on IP. It's not real property wherein they have to pay property tax. All IP holders have to pay is for the patent or copyright application, which is a one shot deal, as well as a tax on any profit made from the IP. If there's no profit they don't have to pay.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Copyleft licenses depend on copyright. But they can't afford to pay a penny in tax, or to track all their contributors and copyright holders. (This latter problem applies to collaborative works more generally.) Perhaps there's some way to craft an exemption when material is released under an open license, but it doesn't seem obvious and would risk locking out innovation in licenses and business models (perhaps a fair trade for all the innovation the scheme might encourage).
Actually, your first sentence has a comma splice. You write it grammar; you can't use a comma to join two clauses like that. Learn the power of the semicolon and, etc. etc.
Whose up next to take there chances with the grammar nazi?
Enjoying something and getting paid for doing it are not mutually exclusive.
Have you heard of this thing called the web? You can "scan" your images, and "post" them on a "site" for all to enjoy. ;)
:)
If people like you, they will donate some money for your time and effort, and you can also sell add space.
What I'm saying is, just because it has remained a hobby does not mean that people wouldn't enjoy you sharing that hobby. The main thing that turns me off of a web comic is lack of updates, but you seem to have a back-log stretching to the 70's!
Just -1, Troll talking to another.
"Nice strawman. You're conflating privacy issues with copyright issues."
The notion of property is a common point between those two issues even if the laws governing them are different.
"It's a shame you don't understand the difference between those two sets of information."
From the standpoint of doing the right thing there's no difference. A failure to understand that results in bad consequences regardless of which one's being talked about.
1. Given that you can't create competition with copyrighted works we have market failure in this case. I would suggest 14 years copyright for music - long enough to make back all money invested + healthy returns but not too long to inhibit the creation of new music and not too long to deny people the right to copy it.
2. We need to allow people to copy music even if the rights holders don't agree, IF the price they charge is too high. I would suggest that any other company could charge whatever it wanted so long as it paid 15 cents per track to the rights holders. That way if for example the music company together with some distributer charges 99 cents a track, another company is allowed to compete with them and charge 25 cents a track. That way 15 cents goes to the artist and original music company and the new distributer has 10 cents per track to cover their costs. Of course if they want to charge 30 cents they can do that too. We get real competition. We just need to keep a small fee paid to the rights holders that is not exorbitant. 99 cents per track IS exorbitant.
3. We need to force limitations on DRM. If you want to use DRM you can but under the following provisos (companies can choose not to use DRM if they do not like them):
a. Since this mp3 should last for life in the same way a CD does it needs to be compatible with a lifetime's wirth of devices. So at any given time it must work with at least 5 different devices and you should be able to remove one and add one as you acquire new devices through your lifetime.
b. If the format in which the file is encoded becomes obsolete you need to provide a way to convert it to a new format free of charge (ie via some downloadable program).
c. No personal information like email addresses or name is allowed in the DRM file.
d. The company must allow me convert from one DRM type to another DRM type if the file is not compatible with one playback device. Eg if Apples' DRM does not work with Zune then apple must allow me to convert it to another DRM type that does work.
e. If a company violates the above rules the copyright is automatically voided for the songs involved, I can sue for damages and I am allowed to crack the DRM.
4. Members of a household are always allowed to share tracks no matter what the end user license agreement says.
5. Libraries can 'lend' out digital music files so long as they pay for each one separately. Of course they must be digitally returned - perhaps by a DRM expiration on a specific device.
The claim is that many hookers are not selling sex out of their free will, and that given an alternative, they would stop selling sex. Thus, the legislators did not feel like coming down hard on a group that already has a difficult time.
I don't think that many people would like to abolish copyright laws. I do however think that many people agree that many of the copyright expansions of the last few decades should be flushed down the toilet. The rights holders talks about a balance between them and consumers, but in fact there is no balance as it is now, it is already extremely tilted in favor of the rights holders.
Prostitution is legal in Spain but pimping isn't.
No sig today...
During WW2 the Russians were practically begging to join us again, but you know, we just can't parent them forever. They have to learn to take responsibility for their own lives.
One of the affirmative defenses against speeding is that everybody is going the same speed. If everybody goes 70mph in a particular place, then the speed limit there is 70mph.
Now _proving_ that is tricky. "The Government" has a duty to determine what the socially accepted speed is in any given location, and to adjust the speed limits there in accordance with same.
The theory breaks down in that "the government" shows up in the form of "a cop" who most people "slow down for", leaving the honest people as statistical outliers subject to enforcement.
By the actual text of the law, the government would have to constantly monitor every bodies speed everywhere, and float the limit as appropriate. Laws like 15mph in a school zone are particularly tricky in this floating respect, especially since they are backed by one of the root passwords to the US constitution: "toh noes! what about teh childrenz?!" That "wrong law" is then used by some to let the "the government" proceed to impose the "national speed limit" etc.
But if you get a speeding beef, and you get a lawyer, he will instruct you about arguing the speed limit instead of the measured speed. That is things like "since everybody around me was doing 70, and there were no countervailing conditions of weather, traction, visibility, imminent endangerment, or driver ability, my speed of 70 was the safest speed for me to be going in that place and at that time."
Keep in mind, the US federal government had no "power" that let it impose the national speed limit of 55mph. What they had was "federal highway funds" and each state was told, if you want to taste the pork, you have to post the signs...
So what is legal, and what is rational, and what is _right_ are unrelated concepts.
Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
--"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
Without copyright, everybody would be forced to self-publish... which may not seem to be a problem by itself, except that those with more money or affluence would be in a better position to receive recognition for their contributions than those who are not in as good a position, even though the latter might have something of equal or potentially greater worth to contribute. Even worse, a highly successful person or organization could potentially take over the publication of something that somebody else who had failed to get noticed did, cutting the original author out of any compensation whatsoever.
Oh, I agree. Copyrights are very important. I used to write myself, mostly short stories and poems but at one tyme I was working on a book and some articles for magazines. Something unfortunate ended my writing. I just wanted to point out that copyrights are a new thing.
FalconShould there be a Law?
RIAA rants
MPAA rants
kamapuaa(555446) rants
Damn that's a long xxAA.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
If buying and broking is illegal but selling isn't, then the prostitute has immunity from prosecution, giving him/her a great deal of negotiating power they wouldn't normally have.
Yeah, it's called extortion and blackmail. Chuckle.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
It would be handy if people posting responses to this could indicate if they have ever created anything from which they gained a financial return due to copyright laws.
What about people who have created things and gained a financial return despite or regardless of copyright laws?
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
The Church of Scientology would dry up and disappear due to a shortage of funds and perceived "star power". I am having a very difficult time understanding what is "bad" about any of this
Hot new Brittney Spears CD, seventeen dollars.
Lost rights and freedom of copyright law, incalculable.
Making people laugh by uttering the single word "Xenu", priceless.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
In third world shitholes with little or no social security, either due to overall poverty of society or rampant free market fundamentalism, that might be true. Thankfully, none of the Nordic countries are counted amongst these shitholes, so a prostitute who refuses the terms of the seller is not going to face starvation.
Besides, this page lists 54 prostitutes in Stocholm alone in a completely public list, so I find it a bit hard to believe that it is actually illegal in Sweden.
Finally, the normal and time-tested way of getting better rates and working conditions is trough a trade union, the forming of which of course requires that the trade is completely legal with no shades of gray whatever. Consequently, such laws might actually end up weakening the position of prostitutes - which, of course, might be their actual purpose. I certainly wouldn't put harming people "for their own good" beneath a politician on a moral crusade.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
rural
While there's a political divide in the US, actually more than one, I doubt that many of them are so much rural vs urban as other divides. The only one I may say are rural vs urban is with farm subsidies. The problem with this though is that I doubt many people, especially those living in cities, actually know that agricultural businesses receive billions of tax payer dollars in subsidies.
It's largely the rural supposedly "small government keep the government out of my life" types who have nothing to fear from terrorist attack who are marching around waving the flag and demanding Big Government police state intruding into our lives and take away our freedom
I don't see it that way, I see as many, if not more, cities dwellers who are afraid of terrorism as are rural people. Take a look at NYC's mayor Bloomberg's plan to install CC cameras all over New York City, duplicating London's nanny state.
Should there be a Law?
TWENTY, not 25. did you actually bother to research it? The reasoning was also NOT "that the people who created the stuff would be encouraged to create more" but that "the people who created in the 1950s are about to run out of royalties". That includes Cliff Rochard. Oh look, I did cover this in detail in the past too...
http://neuron2neuron.blogspot.com/2006/04/royalty-deadlines-told-to-move-it.html first and then http://torrentfreak.com/uk-conservatives-plan-to-extend-copyright/
Since then, Cliff Richard has trialed a pay-by-demand system for his last album, back in November. Please, do try and keep up
Ben Jones
http://torrentfreak.com/author/bjones/
http://neuron2neuron.blogspot.com/
http://www.piracyisnotacrime.com/
http://www.torrentfreak.com
http://neuron2neuron.blogspot.com
http://www.piracyisnotacrime.com
The copyright cartel is doing just fine to polarize the issue on their own, by doing exactly what you said:
DRM, law suits against kids etc etc.Yes, but not against selling sex.
"Property taxes refer only to real estate property"
Total and utter BS. Educate yourself.
Have you never heard of the Personal Property Tax? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_tax
"In the United States, another form of property tax is the personal property tax, which can target
* automobiles, boats, aircraft and other vehicles;
* other valuable durable goods such as works of art (most household goods and personal effects are usually exempt);
* business inventory;
* intangible assets such as stocks and bonds.
In some states, it is permissible to separate the real estate tax, into two separate taxes--one the land value and one on the building value. (See Land Value Taxation.)
Personal property taxes can be assessed at almost any level of government, though they are perhaps most commonly assessed by states."
Wait, I'm not surprised at all. Leeches.
LegalTorrents, pushing in the same direction, is conducting a private beta now and will launch an open site soon.
cartel?
Nobody prevents people from creating their own copyrighted content, and releasing or enforcing it. There isn't even an effective cartel in the music business, much thought people like to think there is.
DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
What chance is there for the small businessman whose product can be shared for nothing by thousands the day after release? I speak here of the indie games developer. Want to hurt them? I sure don't, but if filesharing gets totally legalised, people will think anything on the net is theres for the taking, which is *entirely* wrong.
File sharing should never ever be illegal. The only thing that may be illegal is to share specific files. If I create something, like this post, I should be able to share it with the world, again as I am.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Sounds like fun!
;^P) doors, so naturally theft, rape, and murder are rampant.
;^)
But there are a couple of points where you're wrong about the U.S.
Our police don't actually protect us, the guns are so they can kill us.
Out here in the country in Texas, nobody locks their (they're? there? can't remember
Myself, I don't care much for monster trucks or toting guns and I love a good German beer of a bowl of pasta so maybe I ought to pack my bags
While there's a political divide in the US, actually more than one, I doubt that many of them are so much rural vs urban as other divides.
Forget about specificly rural vs urban issues like farm subsidies.
Rural vs urban life in the US on generally influences general cultural and social views in a variety of ways. Skipping the hows and whys and dodging any value judgments, it is a trivially demonstrable fact that the rural-urban one dimensional axis has a dominant correlation with almost every political issue. There is a simple direct numerical matchup between population density and politics in the US. If you look at a US election map by county, it goes almost exactly by population density. Here's a red vs blue county by county map with population density on the vertical axis. And I think a significant problem with that map in in lack of resolution - an evenly spread Red rural county population may show up higher than a largely empty county with everyone in one or two focused urban/suburban Blue concentrations.
Even in the Reddest states, the most urban areas go Blue.
Even in the Bluest states, the most rural areas go Red.
Red vs Blue is obviously a simplification, but the mere population density axis alone is indeed an extremely powerful predictor in the US on almost all political issues.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
in the US column, we haven't had a war with any of our (immediate) neighbors since 1812, so we're doing pretty good on that front.
The NAZIs tried to get Mexico to attack the US.
FalconShould there be a Law?
It helps if you think of them as speeding fees.
Red vs Blue is obviously a simplification, but the mere population density axis alone is indeed an extremely powerful predictor in the US on almost all political issues.
Way over simplified I think. I'd like to see a breakdown along economic, governmental, and social issues. Myself, I am fiscally and governmentally conservative, ie I support small government. And socially I'm liberal, ie I believe government should stay out of people's lives except when they harm others. Therefore if and when I consider what party affiliation I have I consider myself Libertarian. Actually "liberalism" meant small government, Thomas Jefferon was a liberal and believed in liberty and small government, but it has since been distorted in the US. So now I typically qualify it as Classical Liberal.
FalconShould there be a Law?
It seems to be doing pretty well. A few well-known Swedish game companies and their games:
More information is available on e.g. Wikipedia.
Oh, that's right. When people copy your stuff without permission that suddenly becomes stealing. But taking other people's stuff is OK, right? Right?
Copying isn't stealing, it is infringement if it is a copyrighted or patented item.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I think copyright is a valid way of rewarding content producers for their efforts. It may not be the best way but it does provide some much-needed security. I certainly wouldn't repeal it without putting something else in its place.
On the other hand I don't think that noncommercial filesharing should be criminalised. I'm also in favour of libraries and second-hand bookstores. I'm mostly concerned that there should be some hurdles involved in casual piracy. That is to say, buying the product should always be the path of least resistance, the easiest option. When downloading a product for free becomes as easy as searching for the product on google - no need for P2P clients or torrent trackers or cracks - then I think sales will suffer.
For now, though, filesharing is the equivalent of going to the library when you want to read a book - slightly more hassle, you may not find what you want, but at least it's free.
So gorgeous blond women, beautiful countryside, AND legalized file sharing?
I guess being in America it's pretty sad that I would be shocked to see a government in touch with the people, responding to the people, and actually representing the interests of the people.
Let me check my passport......
There is a fee in the US.
For registered copyrights, I assume?
Yes, you only pay if you want to register a copyright. However if you don't and if someone else infringes on what you wrote the most you can get if you sue is a cease and desist order. If you want to be awarded monetary damage by a court then you have to register the copyright.
FalconShould there be a Law?
True. The creator has every right to keep it to himself. Society can't demand that he publish it. You're starting to get just a hint of the rationale underlying copyright law. Keep following that thread.
Sure someone can keep what they create for themselves however that doesn't improve society. Society itself is improved when progress is available to society. But when they can't get a copyright or patent they don't have much reason to create and if they do then share what they create, other than ego. With FOSS programmers have the choice as to what they do, as long as they create software on their own that is. If they want they can keep it closed or make the code open source. I'm on disability now however this year I want to start working as a photographer. I've been thinking about writing some software that will make it easier to run the business, I'm poor and can't afford to buy commercial software for a photo business. However if I spend much tyme programming then I'll want the option to sell the software to other photographers yet prevent them from being able to turn around and sell the software themselves. However as I improve the software I'd like to open the source of older versions.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Sorry, I mistakenly modded you down instead of up, so I though I'd reply to make my mod go away...
I'm not like other individualists.
That's cool. Photography is a hobby of mine and one that I've often thought I'd love to turn into a business, if I didn't have a bunch of hungry mouths to feed.
Though I've never worked as a pro photographer I got started in photography in high school. I learned the basics of using a 35mm SLR camera as well as how to develop film and make prints when I took a photography class. When I was in the army because I knew these and had an SLR my commanding officer, CO, made me the unit's photographer. When he wanted some photos of the unit, such as during training, he'd get some rolling of film and give them to me. I'd shoot the photos then develop the film and make prints for people. I had some great shots from when the unit went to both Panama and Alaska. Though we were in Alaska 3 weeks I shot a bunch of rolls of film. The CO gave me 4 rolls of 24 exposure black and white and I took 5 rolls of 36 exposure colour film, all of which I burned through before we ever left Alaska. Then I took photography classes in college as well.
What kind of photography do you do? I've done a little of everything, but what I most enjoy is landscapes and candid. Individual portraiture is fun, but only when there's plenty of time, an interesting place to find shots in and no pressure. Group portraits suck and I have little interest in studio or still life photography.
I mostly do landscape and nature though I like others as well. I like from cultural to photojournalism. I've done some night photography but want to do more, both like those of running auto lights on the roads and astrophotography. I've also thought of doing some macro photography. Near by where I live there's a lake and park I like to go to. When it's warm I can shoot the windsurfers on the lake and when frozen I can shoot ice skaters as well as windsurfers. I don't particularly like portraits of people though.
Lately I've become very interested in firearms, and I'm trying to find ways to combine those hobbies.
They both involve shooting. One thing I say about photography is that I have a happen trigger finger. Though I don't when on the shooting range, I was certified an expert in the army. I can burn through roll after roll of film if not for the expense of developing the film though it wouldn't be so bad if I access to a darkroom. Hopefully I'll get access to one soon, there's a photography association here that's open for membership to photographers whether amateur or professional. There they have darkrooms members can use. But anyway in a way I did combine both types of shooting, cameras and firearms. As I said above when I was in the Army my CO made me the company's photographer. And both I and my unit was infantry.
FalconShould there be a Law?
In Soviet Sweden, hooker buy you.
You're right maybe. You argue both for and against copyrights. For instance when you say "I said that in order to obtain copyright protection, they should have to release the source" you're basically arguing for copyrights but when you say "See how they were able to make a living without depending on copyright? There are even more ways in today's world, and far more money available" you're arguing the opposite.
An important element of the promotion of progress in the case of copyright is that copyright specifically does not protect the ideas, only the expression. Contrast this with patents, which protect ideas, but require publication of them.
Can you show where patents protect ideas and not the expression of an idea? Maybe I'm wrong but I always thought patents only protect specific implementations of an idea. If someone else came up with a different implementation or solution than one someone else already patented they could still use their own implementation. Since I've worked on and repaired them I'll use as an example internal combustion engines, there are a number of patents used for them and some are different ways of doing the same thing. All gasoline engine vehicles, all that I know of that is, have starters no matter the make and many different companies make them, yet they are still patented. And if you look at the patent number on one starter it will be different than the numbers on a starter from a different manufacturer. They all do the same thing they just work in different ways.
I never said that creation was cheaper, and it doesn't matter to my argument whether it is or not.
Oh but it does matter. Because it is easier to duplicate something a person created than it is to create something new, there is a very reason for copyrights to exist. For instance I could scan a best seller paperback book then distribute it over the net. All it would take is a little hardware and tyme. Then once I distribute it it's easy for one of the receivers of it to distribute it more. Without copyrights I could do it legally thus possibly denying the writer of income. Meanwhile the writer still has to put food on the table.
FalconShould there be a Law?