I'd bet pretty good money Walther gets their cut for the use of their trademark in the movies. Either that or they're paying the producers to use the replicas.
The point is that Walther is involved in the process and has given their permission.
Worthy of note here is that the N64 game Golden Eye didn't use the names of real guns, presumably because they didn't get permission.
If you really can see the difference in the movie, then the right thing for the moviemakers to do is to figure out if this character is going to be carrying the real thing or a replica, and then make it so in the movie.
And if that's the case, they needed to get permission from LV to refer to a counterfeit product as the real thing. It's that simple.
but I don't know if it is a mistake or if it was intentional.
They knew the bag was a fake, they knew they hadn't cleared it with LV, they were warned, and they went ahead anyway. It really doesn't matter if it was intentional or not.
WB deserves exactly what they're getting; for such a big-budget movie from such a major production house this is a major mistake. They knew what they were doing and they didn't care. I don't give half a rat's ass about LV, but WB is just getting a taste of their own medicine here.
Your door analogy is fundamentally flawed, because the user has to get in some way, otherwise the house (or PC) is useless. The same applies to both. On the house, sure that particular door is difficult to break into because you can't open it from the outside. But somewhere on another wall there's another door that can be opened from the outside, and will have traditional security measures.
That's the whole point of security - to allow authorized entry while making it difficult for unauthorized entry. Your suggestion of making entry impossible is mind-bogglingly stupid in this context.
As someone else pointed out, Boost has several Android phones. Straight Talk also now has two different models (one even has a slide-out full qwerty keyboard) and has the same unlimited $45/month as Boost. To be sure, if you went through the TOS with a magnifying glass it's probably not truly "unlimited" but you're getting the extra features for just the cost of the new hardware. I, for one, am quite content with mine.
Not true. You just have to find the sweet spot of performance/$. My current card (I think it's a 6870 but I'd have to double-check to be sure) cost less than $150 a couple months ago and runs Witcher 2 quite smoothly with high settings. Haven't tried BF3.
That brings up the one huge mistake that the devs made with Rift, which I hope Bioware didn't repeat in this game. And that's fast-tracking the leveling system. WoW had it right at release: leveling your first character to cap for an average player should probably take a few months.
With the leveling experience being this good, I hope it lasts me a while.
I, for one, prefer to have the option to play with other people. Sure there's plenty of asshats to make it worse, but I just get bored when I play single-player RPGs. All the characters seem so wooden, and I keep looking for a real person to talk to.
So KOTR meets WoW is a very good combination for me. Add in the fact that I haven't played a typical MMO for upwards of 6 months now, and I was definitely ready for this game.
The bus drivers still should have avoided the accident - that's the whole point of paying attention and having safe following distance. With the buses not crashing the entire accident wouldn't have been nearly as bad.
So the "professional" drivers did far worse than the kid, and without even having the excuse of a cell phone distraction.
By all means, hang on tightly to the precious drek that only you could have produced. There's only about another 99 quintillion hours of entertainment available out there that are better and cheaper than yours. I'll take some of that instead. And as for my money which is the fruits of my labor, you're not entitled to any of that either and you'll never see a damn red cent.
See, that's the problem with trying to make entertainment your livelihood, especially today - there's way, waaaay too much available. Unless you're one of the.00001% of entertainers who's actually really good, anyone buying your shit is doing you a favor. It hasn't been the other way 'round for a long while now.
The point is that its pretty hard to justify taking a product without paying for it simply because you find the price requested too much. Whether or not a physical product was lost doesnt change that you arent entitled to it just because you really really want it.
That's an entirely different discussion.
This particular thread wasn't about why people pirate, or how they justify it. Go back and reread it.
But then, bear in mind, that entertainment as a whole is not something that anyone ever needs to buy. What entertainment we absolustely have to have to maintain our sanity we can generally provide for ourselves.
On top of that, there's such a glut and over-supply of entertainment available these days, it's almost surprising that *any* of them make much money.
Bottom line, it's a buyer's market, more than any industry has ever been before. The MAFIAA et al keep trying to make that not true, but it's just not possible.
So no, they're not obligated to create the entertainment I want for the price I demand... unless they actually want to turn a profit. If you're in the entertainment business and no one likes what you're creating, it is in every sense of the word, worthless.
The "moral superior" attitude comes from paying someone who actually deserves it, as opposed to paying the MAFIAA who create nothing themselves and charge 5 times what something is actually worth, while passing on next to nothing to the people who actually did the work.
I'll gladly pay an artist if his work deserves it, but I'll be damned if I help enable the abusive greedy behavior of the content cartels. They can go fuck themselves.
Software piracy is one of the reasons the games industry abandoned the PC and moved to consoles. I remember id Software stating that pre-release piracy of Doom 3 on the PC cost them millions of dollars.
I call BS. There's far too many cases of wildly successful PC games both from huge, well-established publishers as well as from small, no-name indie developers - just in the last year alone.
Maybe console games are easier to develop, or maybe they think they have a larger target audience, but you can be pretty damn sure it's not because of piracy.
Someone just starting out has no reasonable expectation to make $500,000 in 4 days. Someone just starting out should be absolutely thrilled if he makes $500 in 4 days. In fact, someone just starting out should be pretty darn happy to be making any money at all in the first 4 days after release.
But that's precisely the whole problem with our IP system in the US. People think that just because they produced some content they should be entitled to loads of wealth, both immediately as well as for the rest of their life for one thing they spent probably less than 100 hours producing.
I could go on, but that's probably enough for now.
Every time an artist does something like this, it pays off greatly.
The most surprising thing here is that anyone finds this surprising.
Artists have been doing just fine in the face of rampant piracy for decades now. Every industry affected by piracy has continuously gotten larger and more profitable.
The only things that have ever hurt these industries are the same things that hurt *any* industry: poor quality products, poor marketing, poor judgement by the manufacturer in setting the MSRP, etc.
I also use adblock because I also don't like ads, but you're missing an important piece of the principle of advertising. You hit on why advertisers are willing to pay for ads, but you ignored the reason why people let them place the ads on their websites, radio stations, etc. It's to pay for the service. Running a website may be cheap, but it's not free.
So here's their options: paywall or ads. We all know which one works, and which one doesn't.
We all like "free" stuff, and ads are what make the "free" world tick.
You bought a playstation 3 which comes with an OS on it. You did not buy the hardware in the unit because it is not sold separately. Its the same as buying an HP computer then bitching because they put ads and bloatware on it. Take it off but the recovery disks are going to contain the same bloatware should you restore it.
Completely irrelevant here. If I bought an HP PC the first thing I would do is format the HDD and remove all ties to HP, while replacing it with my own OS. This is exactly like buying any applicable device and jailbreaking it.
You also may not get to use services that HP has bundled into the OS once you remove that software.
That's fine, I don't want their services.
You cannot just do whatever the fuck you want with whatever the fuck you buy.
You absolutely can, as long as it's not breaking the law. Laws that prevent you from doing what you want even when it doesn't affect anyone else are bad laws and should be changed, which is what the EFF is trying to accomplish.
Also please note that it doesn't matter jack shit what Sony tells you you can or cannot do with their stuff.
The rest of your post is redundant nonsense.
The only thing Sony should be allowed to control is your connection to their servers. The reason they should be allowed to control this (even though cell carriers should NOT be allowed to control connections from jailbroken phones) is because their servers are not required to operate the devices. If you jailbreak a PS3 you are perfectly free to connect to the internet however you wish, you just should not be able to use Sony's online services. (Of course chances are, if you jailbreak a PS3 and throw your own OS on it you don't care about Sony's online services anyway.) This is entirely different from the cell phone situation, where blocking a jailbroken phone essentially renders it useless. The phone isn't just blocked from one set of servers, it's blocked from the entire internet.
No, you're flat-out wrong. The term 'renewable' indicates an energy source that either never runs out or can be indefinitely replaced. There currently exists no such energy on earth. Solar is no more renewable than any fossile fuel; our great big ball of fire out there is slowly burning out, and when it's done there is absolutely nothing we can do to replace it. We also can't keep renewing it so it doesn't burn out. In fact, if anything fossile fuels are more renewable than solar because it is possible to replenish (ie. renew) them. It just takes a lot of time, and we use them far faster than they can be replenished.
Re:Horse and buggy companies didn't make it either
on
The Rise and Fall of Kodak
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I don't think so.
The problem for Kodak is that photography is more and more stratifying itself into two major categories:
1. High-quality digital camers 2. Cell phone cameras
Kodak built its business on cheap cameras that anyone could afford, and, of course, the film. Cell phones are now increasingly replacing Kodak's old niche in the photography world, and they've never really been known for expensive high-quality equipment. Going electronic & digital was simply not enough, they would need to break into an entirely new market or product type to stay alive.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd bet pretty good money Walther gets their cut for the use of their trademark in the movies. Either that or they're paying the producers to use the replicas.
The point is that Walther is involved in the process and has given their permission.
Worthy of note here is that the N64 game Golden Eye didn't use the names of real guns, presumably because they didn't get permission.
If you really can see the difference in the movie, then the right thing for the moviemakers to do is to figure out if this character is going to be carrying the real thing or a replica, and then make it so in the movie.
And if that's the case, they needed to get permission from LV to refer to a counterfeit product as the real thing. It's that simple.
but I don't know if it is a mistake or if it was intentional.
They knew the bag was a fake, they knew they hadn't cleared it with LV, they were warned, and they went ahead anyway. It really doesn't matter if it was intentional or not.
WB deserves exactly what they're getting; for such a big-budget movie from such a major production house this is a major mistake. They knew what they were doing and they didn't care. I don't give half a rat's ass about LV, but WB is just getting a taste of their own medicine here.
Actually, none of the hundreds of pirated DVDs I've watched had that part.
Your door analogy is fundamentally flawed, because the user has to get in some way, otherwise the house (or PC) is useless. The same applies to both. On the house, sure that particular door is difficult to break into because you can't open it from the outside. But somewhere on another wall there's another door that can be opened from the outside, and will have traditional security measures.
That's the whole point of security - to allow authorized entry while making it difficult for unauthorized entry. Your suggestion of making entry impossible is mind-bogglingly stupid in this context.
As someone else pointed out, Boost has several Android phones. Straight Talk also now has two different models (one even has a slide-out full qwerty keyboard) and has the same unlimited $45/month as Boost. To be sure, if you went through the TOS with a magnifying glass it's probably not truly "unlimited" but you're getting the extra features for just the cost of the new hardware. I, for one, am quite content with mine.
Not true. You just have to find the sweet spot of performance/$. My current card (I think it's a 6870 but I'd have to double-check to be sure) cost less than $150 a couple months ago and runs Witcher 2 quite smoothly with high settings. Haven't tried BF3.
It doesn't.
That brings up the one huge mistake that the devs made with Rift, which I hope Bioware didn't repeat in this game. And that's fast-tracking the leveling system. WoW had it right at release: leveling your first character to cap for an average player should probably take a few months.
With the leveling experience being this good, I hope it lasts me a while.
I, for one, prefer to have the option to play with other people. Sure there's plenty of asshats to make it worse, but I just get bored when I play single-player RPGs. All the characters seem so wooden, and I keep looking for a real person to talk to.
So KOTR meets WoW is a very good combination for me. Add in the fact that I haven't played a typical MMO for upwards of 6 months now, and I was definitely ready for this game.
Because a company is considered equivalent to a person like you
Yes, they are, in many ways they shouldn't be. And they keep pushing those limits all the time.
Nice try, troll.
My friend rolled his car because of being distracted by fiddling with the radio.
On the other hand, I don't know anyone personally who's been involved in an accident caused by cell phone distraction.
So the only conclusion we can draw from your conjecture and my anecdotes is that we need some real data.
And then there's those of us who know damn well we're horrible at multitasking. Where exactly do we fit in that study?
The bus drivers still should have avoided the accident - that's the whole point of paying attention and having safe following distance. With the buses not crashing the entire accident wouldn't have been nearly as bad.
So the "professional" drivers did far worse than the kid, and without even having the excuse of a cell phone distraction.
By all means, hang on tightly to the precious drek that only you could have produced. There's only about another 99 quintillion hours of entertainment available out there that are better and cheaper than yours. I'll take some of that instead. And as for my money which is the fruits of my labor, you're not entitled to any of that either and you'll never see a damn red cent.
See, that's the problem with trying to make entertainment your livelihood, especially today - there's way, waaaay too much available. Unless you're one of the .00001% of entertainers who's actually really good, anyone buying your shit is doing you a favor. It hasn't been the other way 'round for a long while now.
The point is that its pretty hard to justify taking a product without paying for it simply because you find the price requested too much. Whether or not a physical product was lost doesnt change that you arent entitled to it just because you really really want it.
That's an entirely different discussion.
This particular thread wasn't about why people pirate, or how they justify it. Go back and reread it.
Of course they're not obligated to create it.
But then, bear in mind, that entertainment as a whole is not something that anyone ever needs to buy. What entertainment we absolustely have to have to maintain our sanity we can generally provide for ourselves.
On top of that, there's such a glut and over-supply of entertainment available these days, it's almost surprising that *any* of them make much money.
Bottom line, it's a buyer's market, more than any industry has ever been before. The MAFIAA et al keep trying to make that not true, but it's just not possible.
So no, they're not obligated to create the entertainment I want for the price I demand... unless they actually want to turn a profit. If you're in the entertainment business and no one likes what you're creating, it is in every sense of the word, worthless.
The "moral superior" attitude comes from paying someone who actually deserves it, as opposed to paying the MAFIAA who create nothing themselves and charge 5 times what something is actually worth, while passing on next to nothing to the people who actually did the work.
I'll gladly pay an artist if his work deserves it, but I'll be damned if I help enable the abusive greedy behavior of the content cartels. They can go fuck themselves.
Software piracy is one of the reasons the games industry abandoned the PC and moved to consoles. I remember id Software stating that pre-release piracy of Doom 3 on the PC cost them millions of dollars.
I call BS. There's far too many cases of wildly successful PC games both from huge, well-established publishers as well as from small, no-name indie developers - just in the last year alone.
Maybe console games are easier to develop, or maybe they think they have a larger target audience, but you can be pretty damn sure it's not because of piracy.
Someone just starting out has no reasonable expectation to make $500,000 in 4 days. Someone just starting out should be absolutely thrilled if he makes $500 in 4 days. In fact, someone just starting out should be pretty darn happy to be making any money at all in the first 4 days after release.
But that's precisely the whole problem with our IP system in the US. People think that just because they produced some content they should be entitled to loads of wealth, both immediately as well as for the rest of their life for one thing they spent probably less than 100 hours producing.
I could go on, but that's probably enough for now.
Every time an artist does something like this, it pays off greatly.
The most surprising thing here is that anyone finds this surprising.
Artists have been doing just fine in the face of rampant piracy for decades now. Every industry affected by piracy has continuously gotten larger and more profitable.
The only things that have ever hurt these industries are the same things that hurt *any* industry: poor quality products, poor marketing, poor judgement by the manufacturer in setting the MSRP, etc.
Apples and oranges.
Nice try though.
I also use adblock because I also don't like ads, but you're missing an important piece of the principle of advertising. You hit on why advertisers are willing to pay for ads, but you ignored the reason why people let them place the ads on their websites, radio stations, etc. It's to pay for the service. Running a website may be cheap, but it's not free.
So here's their options: paywall or ads. We all know which one works, and which one doesn't.
We all like "free" stuff, and ads are what make the "free" world tick.
You bought a playstation 3 which comes with an OS on it. You did not buy the hardware in the unit because it is not sold separately. Its the same as buying an HP computer then bitching because they put ads and bloatware on it. Take it off but the recovery disks are going to contain the same bloatware should you restore it.
Completely irrelevant here. If I bought an HP PC the first thing I would do is format the HDD and remove all ties to HP, while replacing it with my own OS. This is exactly like buying any applicable device and jailbreaking it.
You also may not get to use services that HP has bundled into the OS once you remove that software.
That's fine, I don't want their services.
You cannot just do whatever the fuck you want with whatever the fuck you buy.
You absolutely can, as long as it's not breaking the law. Laws that prevent you from doing what you want even when it doesn't affect anyone else are bad laws and should be changed, which is what the EFF is trying to accomplish.
Also please note that it doesn't matter jack shit what Sony tells you you can or cannot do with their stuff.
The rest of your post is redundant nonsense.
The only thing Sony should be allowed to control is your connection to their servers. The reason they should be allowed to control this (even though cell carriers should NOT be allowed to control connections from jailbroken phones) is because their servers are not required to operate the devices. If you jailbreak a PS3 you are perfectly free to connect to the internet however you wish, you just should not be able to use Sony's online services. (Of course chances are, if you jailbreak a PS3 and throw your own OS on it you don't care about Sony's online services anyway.) This is entirely different from the cell phone situation, where blocking a jailbroken phone essentially renders it useless. The phone isn't just blocked from one set of servers, it's blocked from the entire internet.
No, you're flat-out wrong. The term 'renewable' indicates an energy source that either never runs out or can be indefinitely replaced. There currently exists no such energy on earth. Solar is no more renewable than any fossile fuel; our great big ball of fire out there is slowly burning out, and when it's done there is absolutely nothing we can do to replace it. We also can't keep renewing it so it doesn't burn out. In fact, if anything fossile fuels are more renewable than solar because it is possible to replenish (ie. renew) them. It just takes a lot of time, and we use them far faster than they can be replenished.
I don't think so.
The problem for Kodak is that photography is more and more stratifying itself into two major categories:
1. High-quality digital camers
2. Cell phone cameras
Kodak built its business on cheap cameras that anyone could afford, and, of course, the film. Cell phones are now increasingly replacing Kodak's old niche in the photography world, and they've never really been known for expensive high-quality equipment. Going electronic & digital was simply not enough, they would need to break into an entirely new market or product type to stay alive.