Slashdot Mirror


Sony CEO Proposes "Guardrails For the Internet"

testadicazzo writes "Micheal Lynton, the guy who said 'I'm a guy who doesn't see anything good having come from the Internet. Period.' has posted an editorial at the Huffington Post titled Guardrails for the Internet, in which he defends his comment, and suggests that just as the interstate system needs guardrails, so too does the information superhighway. The following is pretty indicative of the article: 'Internet users have become used to getting things when they want it and how they want it, and those of us in the entertainment business want to meet that kind of demand as efficiently and effectively as possible. But what has happened online is that if it is 'beyond store hours' and the shop is closed, a lot of people just smash the window and steal what they want. Freedom without restraint is chaos, and if we don't figure out some way to prevent online chaos, the quantity, quality and availability of the kinds of entertainment, literature, art and scholarship we need to have a healthy, vibrant culture will suffer.'"

36 of 708 comments (clear)

  1. I'm a guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Who doesn't see anything good having come from Sony

    1. Re:I'm a guy by vintagepc · · Score: 5, Funny

      ...Except the fun people had mailing them bricks in pre-paid envelopes when they recalled their DRM-laden music CDs in Spring 2007.

      --
      Evolution - Est. 4500000000 B.C. Don't piss in the gene pool.
    2. Re:I'm a guy by Moryath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He published in the huffandpuffington post. Are you all that surprised it, like everything else on that site, is just mindless garbage?

      I mean, seriously. I have seen not ONE good article there except the stuff they plagiarize. It seems to be a site that exists solely to push stupidity.

      For example:

      And my point is this: the major content businesses of the world and the most talented creators of that content -- music, newspapers, movies and books -- have all been seriously harmed by the Internet.

      Obviously what he really means is that the Internet is stopping the gatekeepers from controlling who can get published. There are more people publishing their own books independently - rather than having to go through, say, Del Rey - than ever before. The comic pages of the newspaper have been replaced by webcomics but that's not necessarily a bad thing either - either you adapt, like Scott Adams, or you don't and you perish.

      The Internet has brought people with no regard for the intellectual property of others together with a technology that allows them to easily steal that property and sell or give it away to everyone, with little fear of being caught or prosecuted.

      He doesn't give a shit about "theft." He hates the idea of the Internet because it removes the need to keep his dumb ass as the distribution "gatekeeper" and skim money off of the hard work of others.

      Prior to bittorrent, there was Samba sharing as enabled by several crawler-search setups. Prior to those, there was Napster. Prior to those, there were a zillion sites running FTP (ratio or otherwise). Prior to "the internet", there were BBS'es all over. Prior to that, there was sneakernet.

      Go back ~100 years, and dumbshits like this Sony retard were "protesting" and trying to lobby Congress to forbid municipalities from keeping lending libraries (you know, the public library system we all have the right to use for free) because it would "impede sales if people could simply borrow the book instead."

    3. Re:I'm a guy by mdwh2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yet he posts his views ... on the Internet. Period.

      He then refers to the "blogosphere", trying to reduce all criticism to a single entity: "Now, the blogosphere does not take so kindly to provocations like that"

      Lynton may have been privileged to have been offered a publication in a traditional news site, on account of him being CEO of some company, but his words written on the Internet are no different to any kind of blogger. Period.

      On what basis does he claim that newspapers have been harmed? Even if we accept that Internet piracy is causing harm, where is all the newspaper-piracy? Are people distributing copies of the Huffington Post on bittorrent? Is there a Napster for Broadsheets?

      Period.

    4. Re:I'm a guy by beelsebob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't understand this guy, he's complaining that people are making it really really obvious what they'd like to buy. If I were running a company, I would quit complaining and sell it already!

      People don't want DVDs with copy protection notices, and DRM and region coding? Don't sell them! Sell DRM free downloads for a sensible price - that is after all what people are saying they want!

    5. Re:I'm a guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Have a little empathy. What we have is a group of rich, powerful and intelligent people who imagine a changed future in which their personal fortunes may not grow as fast as they do currently. Realizing that an argument like "The Internet is bad because I may not be as wealthy as I'm used to" is not a very persuasive they modify the argument to be: ""The Internet is bad because it means the END of CIVILIZATION as we know it" or something similar.
      As far as I can tell there is fortunately hardly any correlation between creativity and monetary rewards. Great works of art, literature, music etc are far more often created by the impecunious than the wealthy.

    6. Re:I'm a guy by Dan541 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well this is a malware company after all.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    7. Re:I'm a guy by wilhelm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      +1 Insightful.

      You've hit it spot-on. The rich aren't going to be getting richer quite as fast as they used to, and they're upset about it. And of course you know the golden rule, "he who has the gold, makes the rules."

    8. Re:I'm a guy by Moryath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Re: The Bible, you can see such a scaminario right now.

      Just look at the two most recent large-scale cults in existence: Latter-Day Saints and Scientology.

      LDS gives away their book. For free. To ANYONE who wants one, two, three, whatever. Yeah, they're kooks and irrepressibly gullible, but once you get past that, they are actually usually pretty good people - strong morality, strong family bonds, strong ethical sense, hyper-polite. If I were looking for a sales force I'd hire them in a heartbeat. Yeah, their men spend 2-3 years on "mission" trying to peddle their religion to others - but if you can walk away from a job like that, from KNOWING you will have doors slammed in your face or worse, you can sell anything. Yes, when you get closer to their central enclave in Utah, they get downright clannish and antisocial towards anyone who won't be converted after repeat attempts. Yes, I would describe their system as ultimately a "Cult." But they're a cult I can put up with and they don't spend their time trying to hide their doctrine, as opposed to our next exhibit...

      The Cult of Scientology. What you have here is essentially a giant ponzi scheme that rolled a cross in the door and put collars on the "clergy" (whoops that's "auditors") in order to dodge the law. Scientology is famous for charging you into intense debt just to learn the "religious doctrine", and launching lawsuits and worse at anyone who exposes them. Hell, they even have an official policy for ordering a murder. Be very careful if you ever hear one of them mention R2-45: that's their newspeak for "murder someone", coming from the idea of shooting someone twice (R2) with a .45-caliber gun.

      If you're in the Cult, the only way you keep your skin intact is either to (a) become a high ranking member (top level of the ponzi scheme), (b) an indentured slave of the Cult, or (c) be a rich celebrity (Tom Cruise, Greta Van Susteren, etc) who functions as a "recruiter" for the Cult and gets the "services" of the Cult for free.

    9. Re:I'm a guy by shoemilk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And my point is this: the major content businesses of the world and the most talented creators of that content -- music, newspapers, movies and books -- have all been seriously harmed by the Internet.

      It's right there. There's the proof. Which is first on his list? The *IAAs, not the creators. Then to solidify Moryath's point, he goes on and lists newspapers. Newspapers are not being hurt by piracy. Newspapers lost the battle in the 90's when they couldn't get their act together, just like how the *IAAs are suffering now because of clowns like this CEO.

      The creators can do just fine without the businesses. Are you telling me you actually think XKCD or Penny Arcade could exist without the internet? Or that Clap Your Hands Say Yeah becomes an international success without it (I can go to a karaoke place in BFE Japan and sing their songs and I can count the number of westerners on one hand there)? Or that the Simpsons are parodying OK Go - Here It Goes Again without the internet? Does Serenity get made without the internet? Creators will be perfectly ok with the internet, the monkeys on their back, however, are up shit creek without a canoe.

      Copyright is a temporary ceding of our right to our culture to be an incentive to encourage people to produce. The businesses, afraid of losing their free money, panicked and extended it to outrageous lengths and the people rightly revolted. The problem with intellectual property is that it's also our culture. It's who were are, it's how we talk to each other. But with the stranglehold that these leaches have on it, we're losing it.

      And I can't beat you with that, I'll fall back on, "the more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."

    10. Re:I'm a guy by DigitAl56K · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think the most interesting thing is that he doesn't actually comprehend what he himself is saying:

      Internet users have become used to getting things when they want it and how they want it, and those of us in the entertainment business want to meet that kind of demand as efficiently and effectively as possible.

      Okay so far...

      But what has happened online is that if it is 'beyond store hours' and the shop is closed, a lot of people just smash the window and steal what they want.

      Yes, what you are saying there is "we realize that to compete on the Internet where there is a lot of choice available to potential customers we need to meet their expectations for service, pricing, experience, and so forth. If we don't they may end up going elsewhere, and that's a huge problem for us!".

      Perhaps if all the big players had spent as much time investing in the internet as they had fighting it in past they would be in less of a predicament.

      I want service on my terms at a reasonable price without abuse of our relationship through the likes of DRM. If you can't even come close to my terms then we don't do business. It works that way in the real world, why do you think it should work differently online? Too often studios are so threatened by piracy that they impose such abhorrent terms on potential customers that nobody wants to be an actual customer. It's a self fulfilling prophecy perpetuated by the studios themselves.

      Why can't I download FLAC from the majority of online stores for the same price I can download an MP3, or even at all? Why can't I download a movie in high quality without DRM? We both know it's technically possible, we both already know I can get the content elsewhere, and so far as the studios refuse to cater to what I'm looking for at a reasonable price realistically they can't expect anything other than what they're seeing.

    11. Re:I'm a guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Please... as someone that grew up in a "Soviet state" I perfectly know what Communism should have been... and what we had was not Communism. A part from this (old, re-hashed, western propaganda/ignorance) mistake, I agree with what you said. But please drop the "Communism = Soviet Dictatorship" examples... really.

    12. Re:I'm a guy by cjsm · · Score: 5, Informative

      Great works of art, literature, music etc are far more often created by the impecunious than the wealthy.

      How true this is. The greatest artists of the past, Mozart, Bach, Shakespeare, worked for a pittance comapred to what artists make nowadays. And contrary to the argument made that we have to feed the rich more vast sums of money so they keep on producing; the volume of output of am impoverished Mozart or Bach was enormous compared to the output of the pampered rich artists of today. And with a higher quality level.

      --
      This ad space for rent.
  2. You see chaos, I see a level playing field by damburger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    After this and his other comment, I have decided to not buy anything Sony from now on. A healthy, vibrant culture comes from having low barriers of entry to public discourse, not from having a monopoly on the public discourse held by the rich. Why can't these elitist motherfuckers just die already?

    --
    If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    1. Re:You see chaos, I see a level playing field by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sony has for decades now been one of the handful of big media companies that basically controlled the kingdom of all media. During that time, they came to regard that kingdom as their birthright. Then the internet came along, and fewer and fewer peasants were coming around with their tax payments and deference for the king. So now they want to take back their kingdom by force. I think that's a much better analogy than "guardrails on the information superhighway."

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  3. Imagine that by Dolohov · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Internet users have become used to getting things when they want it and how they want it"

    Not at all like rich CEOs, no.

    1. Re:Imagine that by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes, we did. Yes, we got used to instant delivery of digital content to our PCs. We got used to being able to use the content to display on multi purpose machines (like, say, PCs) instead of having to buy a few dozen different boxes to achive the same results. We got used to ease of storage, being able to put hundreds if not thousands of songs, movies, books and other content on a single hard drive, taking up the room a single book or two CDs in jewel cases would.

      Now some bozo comes in and says you can't have that. My only response is "why?". Why not? Because you don't want me to have it? You can't always get what you want, I, for one, would want people to have a clue before they're allowed to open their mouth.

      But then we wouldn't ever have heard that gem from the Sony CEO. Which would be a shame. I dare say it has the potential to become about as powerful as the 'internet tubes' meme.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  4. We don't need Sony though! by 91degrees · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you can't provide what we want, someone else will. Capitalism fills these niches.

    Wolverine was leaked. Maybe it did reduce its potential sales, but it certainly didn't make it impossible to sell tickets for it. The movie industry seems to be able to survive pretty well. Hell, Amazon seems to be doing okay with its mp3 store, even though it's easy to get everything they sell for free.

    I'm happy for regulation to exist that enables you to have a profitable business providing things that consumers need. But I'm only willing to allow that much. We have no obligation to maximise your potential profits.

  5. Re:freedom with restraint is no freedom at all.... by caffeinemessiah · · Score: 5, Funny

    reedom without restraint is chaos, and if we don't figure out some way to prevent online chaos, the quantity, quality and availability of the kinds of entertainment, literature, art and scholarship we need to have a healthy, vibrant culture will suffer.

    As a scholar, I attest that this is absolutely true (boldface mine). If we put our scholarship up for free, the following will happen:

    1. Almost everyone will have access to it! Then my ideas will reach a wider audience, and might make a difference. This is not why I signed up to be a scholar.
    2. The publisher, which makes money on journal subscriptions with my papers, will lose money. Although I will not personally be affected one bit, I can't stand the thought of those nice folks at Elsevier, Wiley and Springer losing money they make off my back, for little to no investment.

    So, to hell with this unrestricted Internet thing.

    --
    An old-timer with old-timey ideas.
  6. great example of sony thinking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Great example of why sony hasn't been doing well. As opposed to changing or modifying their business model to meet the demand "after store hours" the customer should change for sony, not sony for the customer.

  7. Michael Lynton, CEO Troll by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Interesting
    So you justify your statement that "nothing good has come from the Internet. Period." with

    And my point is this: the major content businesses of the world and the most talented creators of that content -- music, newspapers, movies and books -- have all been seriously harmed by the Internet.

    This is the equivalent of a shock statement followed by "Now that I have your attention ..." and is only appropriate when trying to address an auditorium full of teenagers.

    I respect you no more than I would respect someone saying

    The entire world is burning. Everyone is going to die soon. Period.

    Now that I have your attention, I would like to discuss the occasional forest fires that threaten many homes in my state.

    Piracy is a problem but it's your problem, not mine. And it's not on the scale you make of it. I am in no way a party to it so I don't want to hear you bashing the greatest communications tool to date nor do I want to hear suggestions of curbing the freedom I enjoy daily on said communications tool.

    You had to pack up your home DVD stores in South Korea? Do you think that your supposed "guard rails" will be readily implemented world wide and embraced? I'm sorry, go ahead and sue the whole country or pressure the government to crack down on it or stop releasing Korean dubbed movies or--horrors of all horrors--lower your prices to something people are willing to pay? You effectively prevent me from owning any of your DVDs when the technology to digitally duplicate them is readily available and dirt cheap. That's your choice and you're free to opt for that.

    Your comparison to the Interstate Highway System is laughable. Please, do me one favor. In the future, when you draw comparisons of physical theft and huge undertakings like the Interstate Highway System to file sharing and "the Internet" do not confuse physical materials with information! There are major differences--for example: information can be freely replicated with no transfer of resources between the two parties involved! You draw a poor analogy and then *wave of the hands* we need protections like this. What "guard rails" do you suggest for the internet? I mean specifically, what do you have in mind? Have you thought this out at all? I'm sure you don't know but your engineers could suggest a small program from Sony that every internet user has to install on their computer to access the internet that has access to kernel space and ... yeah, I think we've been down this road.

    --
    My work here is dung.
  8. That horse has bolted by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not only has that horse bolted from the stable already, but it is now married with 10-year old kids. Trying to stop it now will work about as well as prohibition did back in the 20's, which was ill-founded for the same reason: EVERYONE was already doing the thing you're wanting to make illegal!

    --
    stuff |
  9. Who else smashes windows? by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The RIAA and MPAA, who smash our home windows and front doors to come and riffle through our things looking for evidence that we're all bandits out to rob them blind so they can sue us for hundreds of thousands the moment they find a single downloaded song. Oh, the irony.

  10. A real live abuse of an association meme! by inviolet · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In the very clever book "Virus of the Mind", the author defines an "association meme" as a social idea about how one thing goes with another. Examples of association memes include: "Cereal is for breakfast", "Muffins are for breakfast", and "Chocolate cake is not for breakfast". Merchants wishing to sell chocolate cake for breakfast (including Starbucks) must work within these memes, which is why they bake their product into a muffin shape. Quite a clever little manipulation.

    Turning now to the summary:

    Micheal Lynton, the guy who said 'I'm a guy who doesn't see anything good having come from the Internet. Period.' has posted an editorial at the Huffington Post titled Guardrails for the Internet, in which he defends his comment, and suggests that just as the interstate system needs guardrails, so too does the information superhighway.

    To extend "Virus of the Mind"'s ideas, guardrails are an association meme. We associate them with benevolence, with keeping us safe, and with an obvious danger. Lynton is invoking that meme, muffin style, to manipulate us into accepting something we otherwise would reject. The chocolate cake he is selling for breakfast should properly invoke the meme of a school principle, but if it did, nobody would accept it.

    I will contribute a dollar to any charity raising money to put Lynton onto a ship and dump him onto a deserted island, never to return. Let's see how he, a professional influencer who, in influencing the movements of billions of dollars, has never produced so much as a grain of wheat, fares alone.

    --
    FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
  11. Re:I don't buy it by dov_0 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Also 'Store times'? Who's time? From what time zone? Sheesh. This guy is stuck in the 1890's.

    --
    sudo mount --milk --sugar /cup/tea /mouth /etc/init.d/relax start
  12. Cars by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 5, Funny

    suggests that just as the interstate system needs guardrails, so too does the information superhighway.

    I think he's actually right. One time, when my Cat6 cable had too tight of a bend, I had packets breaking through and slamming against the wiring closet wall. It was... terrible.

  13. Re:Sony saying this? by 91degrees · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is a very good point. Sony squandered the moral highground a long time ago.

  14. Re:I don't buy it by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Culture is much more than what you can sell.

    That's it exactly. Did Michelangelo lock the doors to the Sistine Chapel and stand outside charging $20 a head (sorry, no cameras or sketchpads allowed) to come in and see his masterpiece? No.

    Did Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart charge each symphony that wanted to play his pieces a separate fee for each concert they performed? No.

    Did Leonardo Da Vinci hide digital watermarks in Mona Lisa so he could make sure no one was stealing his work? No.

    Does Sony think The Fugees are in the same caliber as any one of the above artists in terms of culture?

  15. Re:freedom with restraint is no freedom at all.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    GTFOMP.

    Get The Fuck Off My Poland ?

  16. Because we were here first! by bughunter · · Score: 5, Insightful
    What's wrong with this picture?
    1. University Nerds create internet for sharing research data.
    2. Open information concept attracts more nerds, some anarchists, and a whole lotta hedonists.
    3. Someone starts making money selling internet access.
    4. Big Business sees a market and starts selling things on the internet; information proves most popular.
    5. Big Business starts complaining that "sharing data" and "open information" conflict with its maximized profits.
    6. Big Business starts demanding laws outlawing open information.

    We were here first, dammit.

    (And your track record precedes you, thief.)

    --
    I can see the fnords!
  17. Why S.Korea isn't buying what you're selling by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Oh how I wish that this could be read by Mr. Lynton, but unfortunately even if he read it, he JUST WOULDN'T GET IT anyway.

    Lynton refers to how Sony has essentially closed shop in South Korea because those sneaky Koreans can download his DVDs too fast, so they have no incentive to buy them. Well, I'll tell you why people in South Korea and elsewhere are bypassing Sony. It's your fault. And I'm going to explain why it's your fault and I'm not even going to go down the path of telling you that American movies mostly suck. While that's certainly true, that's not why South Koreans and others aren't buying from your stores.

    Hollywood, which includes you Mr. Lynton, is its own worst enemy. Let's take a look at what you release to foreign markets. There's a huge demand for region 1 (USA/Canada) DVDs around the world. Know why? It's because region 1 DVDs mean quality. Region 1 DVDs typically use progressive video and high quality audio (DTS for example). Region 1 DVDs often have extras and while personally I'm not real fond of extras most of the time, the marketplace here seems to want it. Let's look at what you give to people in South Korea, which is region 3 for those keeping score. Well, you often release a film with zero extras. You sometimes give them interlaced video and lower quality audio choices (AC3 only and at low bit rates). I have no idea if the subtitles you give them are any good or are as bad as some of those bad English subtitles we used to get on Hong Kong movies in the past. And here's the best part of all - you and your cabal have "persuaded" almost every single DVD manufacturer to stop making DVD players that can have the region settings changed. So now Samsung, a very large company in, hmmm, South Korea, simply does not make a DVD player anywhere in the world now that can be made region free. They are not alone in this. I participate in a large video forum and you know what one of our most popular questions from new members is? How can I make my DVD player region free? You know what the answer is? Often it is "You can't". So you, Mr. .Lynton, sold an inferior product to your customers around the world and in your paranoia over piracy made sure that they could not buy a superior product from region 1 and watch it on their TVs at home. And to top it all off, while you and your Hollywood buddies have slit your own throats you are convinced that someone else has done you wrong. What's really sad is that doing things like having region codes to begin with and convincing Samsung and others to stop making consumer friendly DVD players has caused those customers to look for alternatives - "free" copies of your DVDs that don't have region codes in them so they can play them at home. So no, I don't feel sorry for you because you did this to yourself and what you and your buddies in Hollywood think that consumers want is not what they want at all. If you want to fix this, put out better product overseas and start encouraging those same DVD player manufacturers to make region free DVD players because until you give up on region coding and finally understand how much we, your potential consumers, hate it, you're basically grasping at sand and not understanding why it's running through your fingers.

  18. Re:Let them eat DRM by Yvan256 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Woo-hoo! Cake!

  19. Re:freedom with restraint is no freedom at all.... by avm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ok, let's keep the car-analogy meme going here...it seems that this joker's viewpoint is a little more like this:

    You can have this car in any color you want, as long as it's black. Oh, and paint, brushes, spray guns and air compressors are now illegal, and if we suspect you may be inclined to change your car's color, we can preemptively search for and seize afrementioned equipment which surely is only useful for committing unauthorised car recoloring.

    Or something...

  20. Old control freak run companies by MindKata · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "On what basis does he claim that newspapers have been harmed"

    Its the same thinking as Rupert Murdoch, i.e. "News Corp will charge for newspaper websites, says Rupert Murdoch"
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/may/07/rupert-murdoch-charging-websites

    Rupert Murdoch and this Sony CEO are the same type of person. People like them don't get to become high up in corporations without being power seeking control freaks. Their ruthless arrogant self serving behavior provides them with a competitive advantage which allows them to fight their way high up the corporate hierarchical power tree structures to gain power over others. This is why their kind of personality type feature so prominently in very competitive environments like business and politics.

    So its no wonder the people at the top of these corporations think in terms of how to apply pressure to control others. They do that in their jobs to stay at the top so its no surprise they apply that same kind of thinking to the Internet.

    For so many decades these control freak kind of people ruled over the old school media to control what people could see and when they could see it and for how much. These control freaks can't cope with a new open world where people can choose what they want to see and when they want to see it and even see it for free. Its an alien world to the control freaks. They want to be in power, to control others, they don't want open sharing of information.

    The new and media companies are not going to die. Its simply evolving into media outlets that provide content that attract like minded people around open information that appeals to this group of people. The companies that work like this will gain advertising and other incomes like in some cases merchandising and cross promotional incomes etc.. while the old control freak media companies will die out as they fail to control what people can see and do.

    The sooner the better.

    --
    There are 10 kinds of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.
  21. XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The point is exactly right. Does anyone honestly believe XKCD would be published in any major newspaper? Yet look at how far it's going as a webcomic.

    1. Re:XKCD by schmiddy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I love XKCD as much as the next bloke, but let's at least be fair in our hypotheticals. Would Calvin & Hobbes* exist if Bill Watterson had been born twenty or thirty years later? I'm doubtful.

      * Watterson was vehemently opposed to commercializing the art that he saw his comics to be -- hence the lack of any official C&H merchandise, as opposed to Randall's business model.

      --
      http://cltracker.net -- powerful craigslist multi-city search