From TFA - Companies with multiple copies can seek vouchers that will enable them to buy computer equipment and software.
I assume that means Microsoft hard/software. So how does this hurt Microsoft? Nothing like encouraging vendor lock-in.
See, that's the problem.
What incites teenagers and young adults to be rebellious and makes them want to "Stick it to the Man"?
Rock and Roll. or if you want to trace it back further, music in general. Jazz, Big Band, everything right back to the first cave-teen who banged two rocks together has been celebrating his/her independence from all things authority.
Now, what is popular today? That's right, pop/psudo-rap/hiphop crap, produced and approved by...dun, dun, dun... THE RIAA. The Man wins.
Until the teenagers and would-be activists start listening to anything other than the bullcrap produced, approved of, and shoved down their throats by the very corporation they should be fighting, Rock Is Dead.
Just stopping your purchasing might not be enough for them to realize WHY people aren't buying their crap anymore.
It's obviously because of all the cheap bastards using bittorrent to pirate all of their stuff. It couldn't be anything they did, they are the film industry.
Since when is disagreeing with a companies business decisions not a good reason to stop using their products? That's kinda the only way for the public at large to keep corporations even remotely close to ethical (not that it always works).
You may not agree that Novell has done anything worth boycotting them for, but isn't that up to their customers (in this case Linux users) to decide? You make your choice, and even try to make others see it your way, but don't knock the system. It may not be perfect, but it's all we got.
After RTFA, I have changed my origional reaction of "Great, all we need, more people convinced that copyright is god." I think that in this situation, the students do need to be educated, so that they can receive attribution. I just hope that the include alternative concepts of copyright, like Creative Commons.
Well, then! That is just the kind of thing that needs to be nipped in the bud!
You need to send your ISP a DMCA notice to take your IP off of the intra-tubes!
And to stop changing it around!
Posted AC due to the vanishingly small number of Slashdot moderators that earning a living making or distributing media. The problem isn't that the state of copyright infringement is keeping people who earn a living making media from profiting. It's that it is keeping people who make a living distributing media from profiting. The distributors don't pay the makers any differently whether the film is pirated or not. The real problem is that we no longer need the distributors; And they don't like it.
It is time for a paradigm shift.
So, in this sense, a single Unix-y alternative OS getting through the doors will probably open the door for others to come in, too. By gaining 10-15% market share, Apple might actually increase Linux adoption as well. Absolutely. If there are more Macs out there, people will see them and realize that they have a choice.
For instance: if I buy a movie on tape, and later want to digitize and burn it on disc, no harm is done to anyone - so, no ethical problem. This should be legal.
But if, say, the MPAA wanted to force me buying the movie again on dvd, based solely on the idea of copyright, this is immoral gouging. They do this.
On the other hand, if the version on dvd is much better (clean sound, image, extras), I might want to buy it again, *if* the price is reasonable. And this is a valid concept as well.
This isn't a "silly example" it's common sense and exactly the kind of thing that the MPAA is trying to inhibit.
See, the problem is that it isn't supposed to be a game. It is supposed to be, quite literally, a second life, that is, a place, online, where you can do pretty much anything you can do in real life, plus.
I tried SL a while back, expecting a really cool "game" I didn't like it. It wasn't a game. But that doesn't mean that you can't appreciate it for what it is.
I can see where you are coming from, but I think your analogy is flawed. The artists != the RIAA (or, rather, the record labels that make up the RIAA) most artists look at the RIAA as being the best way to the top (which it is) and don't question the moral stance, and many have no business capabilities. The truth is, you don't know what the individual artists' views on DRM, the RIAA lawsuits, etc, are. All you know is that they have a contract to get their stuff published with the record labels.
I wasn't making an analogy between the roads and the internet (we all know the internet is more like tubes than roads). I was using the traffic laws as a blatantly obvious case where government regulation was needed.
Any musician whose record label funds the RIAA has no standing, in my opinion, to make statements about what is just. And this "If you aren't with us, you are against us!" stance is exactly the kind of thing that has destroyed any sense the American political system ever had.
They are taking a stance on an issue. If you support that stance, don't depreciate it just because you disagree with them on another.
Convincing them they are wrong about the RIAA isn't going to be accomplished by knocking them every time they make a statement about anything. If anything, it hurts the cause that you agree on.
Why not give credit for what they do right and keep the two issues separate?
Good grief the RIAA is for Net neutrality... I feel like I need to take a long shower and scrub really hard now.. Now, if we could only get Verizon and Comcast to lobby for eliminating DRM, we could just set back and watch.
And what vested intrest do zookeepers and botanists have in net neutrality?
Better yet, how can zookeepers and botanists get the message about the existance of net neutrality?
Slashdot Mirror
From TFA - Companies with multiple copies can seek vouchers that will enable them to buy computer equipment and software. I assume that means Microsoft hard/software. So how does this hurt Microsoft? Nothing like encouraging vendor lock-in.
So, bye, bye, Miss American pie...
Sorry about the latent ambiguity, fixed that for you.
See, that's the problem. What incites teenagers and young adults to be rebellious and makes them want to "Stick it to the Man"? Rock and Roll. or if you want to trace it back further, music in general. Jazz, Big Band, everything right back to the first cave-teen who banged two rocks together has been celebrating his/her independence from all things authority. Now, what is popular today? That's right, pop/psudo-rap/hiphop crap, produced and approved by...dun, dun, dun... THE RIAA. The Man wins. Until the teenagers and would-be activists start listening to anything other than the bullcrap produced, approved of, and shoved down their throats by the very corporation they should be fighting, Rock Is Dead.
Here here! Couldn't have said it better.
Just stopping your purchasing might not be enough for them to realize WHY people aren't buying their crap anymore. It's obviously because of all the cheap bastards using bittorrent to pirate all of their stuff. It couldn't be anything they did, they are the film industry.
...based on a Broadway Musical.
Since when is disagreeing with a companies business decisions not a good reason to stop using their products? That's kinda the only way for the public at large to keep corporations even remotely close to ethical (not that it always works). You may not agree that Novell has done anything worth boycotting them for, but isn't that up to their customers (in this case Linux users) to decide? You make your choice, and even try to make others see it your way, but don't knock the system. It may not be perfect, but it's all we got.
It's not as funny when it's true.
Free speech be damned, give me a beer and a woman! Rarely has the current American public sentiment been so concisely put.
causing searchers to be (in his words) 'carjacked' Is that an implied car analogy?
I thought one of the implications of the singularity was that the future would be harder to predict, not easier.
After RTFA, I have changed my origional reaction of "Great, all we need, more people convinced that copyright is god." I think that in this situation, the students do need to be educated, so that they can receive attribution. I just hope that the include alternative concepts of copyright, like Creative Commons.
Well, then! That is just the kind of thing that needs to be nipped in the bud! You need to send your ISP a DMCA notice to take your IP off of the intra-tubes! And to stop changing it around!
Actually, "Keeping up with the Jonses" is an American/Western concept, not human nature.
Posted AC due to the vanishingly small number of Slashdot moderators that earning a living making or distributing media. The problem isn't that the state of copyright infringement is keeping people who earn a living making media from profiting. It's that it is keeping people who make a living distributing media from profiting. The distributors don't pay the makers any differently whether the film is pirated or not. The real problem is that we no longer need the distributors; And they don't like it. It is time for a paradigm shift.
See, the problem is that it isn't supposed to be a game. It is supposed to be, quite literally, a second life, that is, a place, online, where you can do pretty much anything you can do in real life, plus. I tried SL a while back, expecting a really cool "game" I didn't like it. It wasn't a game. But that doesn't mean that you can't appreciate it for what it is.
I can see where you are coming from, but I think your analogy is flawed. The artists != the RIAA (or, rather, the record labels that make up the RIAA) most artists look at the RIAA as being the best way to the top (which it is) and don't question the moral stance, and many have no business capabilities. The truth is, you don't know what the individual artists' views on DRM, the RIAA lawsuits, etc, are. All you know is that they have a contract to get their stuff published with the record labels.
I wasn't making an analogy between the roads and the internet (we all know the internet is more like tubes than roads). I was using the traffic laws as a blatantly obvious case where government regulation was needed.
And what vested intrest do zookeepers and botanists have in net neutrality? Better yet, how can zookeepers and botanists get the message about the existance of net neutrality?