ACAP (I feel) is simply about protecting a content originators rights, (it's IP) pertaining to content that has been published by them. And just who they (a publisher) then may decide, is permitted by that fundamental Law (associated with that Intellectual Property RIGHT that they legally "own"), to publish in FULL or, PART, accordingly.
Has it "dawned" on anyone that "they" (publishers) may have "devised" a better, more cost effective way that they can get to "share" their original content (with each other?) and support their "own" Ads Networks in their doing so?
That they (those represented by ACAP) also may feel the collective billions in annual "lost" Ads revenues from their original "hard copy" (to the net & specifically SE's, to date) may even be (mostly) recoverable, in their doing so?
And if this is the case, who could blame them for doing so? Simply moving to protect what is theirs. I know of some (talked of, over) 4 million websites already, that are 'in place' to receive their "work" (current and historical) in what would appear on the surface, a much better approach being made than is their current situation.
http://www.vortal.com/news_results.php?search=tech%20ACAP
To me, ACAP is very clear and long overdue as a means of protecting original content be it current or, historical.:)
LC
Slashdot Mirror
ACAP (I feel) is simply about protecting a content originators rights, (it's IP) pertaining to content that has been published by them. And just who they (a publisher) then may decide, is permitted by that fundamental Law (associated with that Intellectual Property RIGHT that they legally "own"), to publish in FULL or, PART, accordingly. Has it "dawned" on anyone that "they" (publishers) may have "devised" a better, more cost effective way that they can get to "share" their original content (with each other?) and support their "own" Ads Networks in their doing so? That they (those represented by ACAP) also may feel the collective billions in annual "lost" Ads revenues from their original "hard copy" (to the net & specifically SE's, to date) may even be (mostly) recoverable, in their doing so? And if this is the case, who could blame them for doing so? Simply moving to protect what is theirs. I know of some (talked of, over) 4 million websites already, that are 'in place' to receive their "work" (current and historical) in what would appear on the surface, a much better approach being made than is their current situation. http://www.vortal.com/news_results.php?search=tech%20ACAP To me, ACAP is very clear and long overdue as a means of protecting original content be it current or, historical. :)
LC