"Mere access to credit card numbers and the corresponding user list does not constitute a major threat, IMO. "
Well it is a major source of illegal funds for individuals and bad groups. So your indemnified, the Credit Card company or the insurance company isn't and if they get hit, you get hit, in increased rates or having harder to get credit. They are in business and they make money, your money. It just appears like it does not concern your pocketbook. Look at all the doctors going out of business or out of State because of a different kind of legalized theft by lawyers. Someone is making money here and its not you or me.
Sorry, the internet is not just for the initiated anymore. Not for years. The 10 minutes you speak of research only applies to someone who knows what a tcp port is and how to ask the question. Some people will never know what questions so ask of of whom and how to solve the problem. Most environment don't come with easy ways to do this. You often have to find (buy/download) software, install it (software firewalls and the like) then limit the ports. Knowing my own father who wants a PC hooked to the internet, these concepts are very foreign. He has'nt a chance of knowing what to do or what risk he is in. But he is not stupid.
The problem to use your analogy which I like is like living in a gang controlled neighborhood. The problem and fault is with the gangs, not the home owners sitting on the porch. I was talking about where the responsibility lies. Actually I would say its more like a good neighborhood that a bad malicious element has moved in. There is no excuse for their behaviour. It is not the type of neigborhood any of us want.
To compound the problem, no manufacturer or computer store is going to tell the consumer of the risks, well maybe to sell more stuff, but certainly not Microsoft or Best Buy, or Comcast. It is not in their best interests to tell people they are walking into potentially risky environments and that they need to be constantly vigilant and continually upgrade and patch to stay safe.
Part of that is software quailty and part is malicious behavior. Both of these need to be fixed.
Try going to someone in your family who has a computer but not in the business and not stupid and just see if they can find out what they need to do and how to shut down which tcp ports in 10 minutes. It might be and eye opener to the magnitude of that problem.
"Anyone stupid enough to allow incoming RPC packets from the internet deserves what they've got coming."
And I suspose that someone who drives down the street and suffers from a stray bullet from a bank robbery is stupid, or a someone sitting on their porch and is a victim of a drive by shooting. Lets not get confused with who is at fault and how malicious these things can be. There is not excuse for worm or virus creation. There is no justification for worm or virus creation.
The idea that people who purchase computers and hook to the internet are "stupid" if they haven't researched the latest esoteric system problems and downloaded and patched their home computer is elitist and wrong headed. Or that that unethical unprincipled people have worked hours and hours finding bugs in systems and designed code that will invade, possibly damage or destroy someone elses property, makes the victim "stupid" or the coder "clever". Lets keep some perspective about who is who and what is what.
" Slap privacy on something and you can generate controversy pretty easily, but soda machines charging more when the weather's hot is nothing new."
But, if you walk up to the machine and the numbers flip and charges you $20 for a coke because it detected the Guichi belt from the electronic ID chip in it, and the next person in line gets charged.50 because it didn't, can you see how the sale of Guichi belts will drop off.
There is a business model in consumables that is one price to everyone for this product. In barter societies this is different. I personally like the one price thing. The suggestion here is not barter but more like a silent auction behind the scenes to determain what the maximumn price they can get from you is.
The insurance company model is probably closer to this but for commodities from the same company I think it is just too greedy and sneaky.
Perceptions is 9/10 of the business. Your "Home Page" should have some "Home Security" don't you think. I think most people who have internet access feel that that is their private space, an extension of their home. The marketing image is such. You don't see an ISP tauting, "come with us, you can have a cardboard box full of your personal information that people can rummage through like a flea market offering". No they sell secuity and privacy and warm fuzzy service.
The RIAA onslaught attacks that image and could change the way people view the internet and maybe make that business dry up. Take as an example the Airline industry and how a little change in perception (as opposed to actual risk) can almost being down the industry. Another example is whats happened to Halloween. People tend to be very risk adverse when it comes to things close to Home or personal security.
So it is in the best interests of the big ISP's to show that they are fighting for that image if not the reality. If they went down on the other side of the issue the image damage might not be repairable.
So we have two business models fighting for territory and existance.
Now me, I'll sit in the stands and root for the home team.
"These are very tangible and reasonable criteria they're using to make these determinations."
As a part time university teacher I found out when one student was giving me trouble that he had been giving others trouble as well. I was not told of the trouble because that information would have biased my perseption of and treatment of that student. That is an important principle that may be violated here if "teacher" were to get ahold of that data.
Schools administrations would use the data for those things that were most important to them. This may include avoiding lawsuits, eliminating trouble makers. With limited budgets and overcrouded classrooms the insentives would be to diminish classroom size and be able to apply budget to where it would be most effective. You know the current political envirionment is one to privatize or business-tize all activity.
Now with that information would be very useful to at tracking teachers. Lets see, at teacher that has mass defections, well lets get rid of them. Or classes that have certain individuals attending, show scores dropping (trouble makers and cultural disruptors). The data mining capabilities are endless. But of course the adminsitrators would never think of using the data in these ways.
I am reminded of a story where a friend had a meeting with their boss. The boss offered them a project. They said they would like it. It was given to someone else. The reason was the boss said that even though she said yes, her body language said no. The same danger is here with the interpretation or "profiling" of individuals from scan data.
"Seriously as members of a community we are expected to contribute to that community as well as take away, other wise the community collapses. Voting is your way of saying this is the person/group I want leading the community. If you don't vote then you have no right to complain about who gets in. "
I beg your pardon. Voting for someone you dont believe in compromises your integrity. We are not required to vote but our right to complain is sacrosanct and enshined in the Constitution.
You are suggesting a change in the basic fundementals of our society. I think that is a slippery slope to requiring prayer in schools or to answer those questions that lawyers always like to ask like "when did you stop beating your wife".
Damned if you do damned if you don't.
Lets all get those pet ID chips installed in our heads and be done with this freedom thing.
Just think how easy things will be. You go through the door to the store and it automatically debits you account. You automatically get debitted when you drive through the toll booth, and you will automatically be picked up when the new not elected Executive decides youre cost benefit ratio has exceeded your value to society. What a wonderful world we are destined to.
Are all those used CD stores in violation of copyright. There are big chains like Best Buy and little ma and pa stores making money of the resale of CD's. In this transaction the copyright owner gets no benefit. Is this a "fair use".
If so then maybe a model of selling the rights to someone to "own" the used copy say for a penny would suffice. If that system then no longer allowed you access to that copy. So the copy would have an owner for the duration of time that they were playing the music, then maybe offer it back up for sale. Micro Payment systems would be ideal for this. If you seeded the business with used CD's to begin with then the copyright holder would be out of the picture altogether.
The business could keep track of usage and sell that information to the media and companies to track on popularity and trends.
I am not advocating not giving royalty to artists (I have an issue when the copyright is held by a company and not the artist). I think that "creative people" should make resonable payback for their work.
But this used CD industry is a big one and alive and well in your neighborhood.
Is it an industry that the RIAA will try to shut down next (after the P2P networks and the kids and their parents)? or is this a "fair use". Or does it depend on the EULA that you agree to when you break the seal?
"The other side of the issue, of course, is the effect overseas. What has happened in China over the last 20 years, for example, is astounding in terms of the numbers of people lifted out of abject poverty."
Yes a very good thing except as China climbs up on the consumer economy bandwagon (as it is a a frightning pace), the world will suffer from additional load on oil resources, which are projected to reach half of global reserves gone by 2037 or sooner, then prices will just climb), Global warming, increased garbage and waste problems (now they are very ecological with the rural recycling of waste). We are all in for a treat with the largest population centers starting to heat up economically, India too.
We will have to find something new which we can have as our own special skill or service. We can't just be a country of executives living off sales to local consumers who dont have jobs because their jobs have been moved off shore. They will probably just sell to the consumers in these new markets making way for a greater seperation of wealth in this country. We have seen this trend since Pres. Reagan.
Actually the way that happens is a foreign company buys a company (fill in the countries) and then moves executive management responsibility out of country as well as move foreign people into local executive positions. In my case that included moving much IT work out of country, and selling all us software developers to an outsourcing firm, which sold us again to a different outsourcing firm. My IT outsourcing company (US based) is talking of outsourcing the heavy programming to India and Irerland. But I am still at the same desk doing the same job and expected to have some loyalty and professionalism when it comes to my company dejour and the company that I really do the work for that sold us several years ago.
Well Quick and dirty is good with an eye towards and hooks for the proper way. Its all balance and a good OOP interface can allow you to fill out the implementations later. You should not skimp on the interfaces though.
Refactoring I see is just another word for going back and doing it right the second time. In this situation. And the fancy term sounds like your giving value added, which you are, and you have continued employment....
I think there is a deeper issue here other than Field Proceedures of the FBI. The fact is that a crime was being committed. They knew it and with a phone call to the ISP caused the ISP to take some action. The victim's are all the users that get their passwords and information stolen.
The analogy would be that they have hijacked a store front to steal from people coming into the store front. The miss-directed traffic is not the real crime. The ISP only has some liability if the people who have had thier information and eventually money stolen, sue.
I'm sure that people who are kidnapped and people who are robbed and people who are raped are all at fault.
This thinking is what falsely give hackers some sense that they are not doing wrong.
Oh, lets just go into that persons house and steal there money and burn their furntature.. Its there own fault for not having titanium steel reenforced doors and windows..
I love the arguments about surviving family and they are as I see it legitimate and beneficial. The idea of Copyright turns, intangeble thing into a property, an intellectual property. It is not a piece of land or a chair or chattle , but it has been turned into a legally defensible property. Where you can have a tug of war over a chair, with Intellectual property, there is no physical property to chain down or lock away. Its an interesting construction this idea of Intellectual property, a relatively new thing at that.
So we have made these etherial things into property and have to protect from "copying" because that cloning of the etherial is possible at no cost to the "owner" other than the loss of the ability to gain profit from selling their own "sanctioned" copy.
The Copyright law, like other laws of Intellectual property allow economic incentive to produce works so there is some benefit. The additional term extending the life of a "Copyright" allows extension of the idea the the owner has a family and has a right and responsibily to that family to its welfare. The property passes to them as part of his/her estate, for a time. This all make sense.
What doesn't make sense it that this property is also a commodity and is most often sold to a company (record, publisher, the company who pays your salary...) and that property is owned by that company who makes the profit from that Intellectual property not the author/creator or their family. This argument for the extension seldom benifits the widows and orfans but the Owners, CEO's and executive and shareholders (to a lessor extent) of large corporations. Now there is the same argument for Intellectual property for corporations as incentive for doing researh but lets be clear on the motives behind the extension to copyright periods and who is persuing copyright infringment cases.
I would think a wonderful shakeup in the rules would be to tie copyright to individuals (possibly a percentage thing for teams), and that companies would not be allowed to hold or own copyrights themselves. That the the estates of the holders would recieve the property and that other arrangements, contractual arrangements for 'licensing' the use can still be made, but that the ownership remain with the creator. How many times have large corporations gouged artists and creators for their ideas. The Sears / snap-tool suit comes to mind.
Well in the corporate world, at least the world I am in, The large remote parent company in a different country has its Architecture Standards group the works out the standards for everyone and every thing.
One size fits all only if its clown shoes your wearing.
Lets be clear first that not everyone agrees on what intellectual property is, or how long it exists. Different countries, different times have had different takes on this kind of property. IP is owned for a time then goes into the public domain. That time was lengthened by congress essentially so Disney would not loose control of Steamboat Willy. The time was lengthened for the rights to be held on this "image" for 99 years I believe, up from what 17 years or 20 years passed the creators death, whatever.
The Electromagnetic spectrum used to be public domain. Now it is illegal to listen into certain frequencies. Talk about a human construction. Ham radio's in this country can't be sold if they can tune in frequencies that they should not.
It comes down to business and allowing people to have a monopoy for a time on some business they can profit from. They have lobbied in the governments for that right and have recieved laws to protect those monopolies. But it is a human construction and is not universal. There are peoples that still believe that no one owns land.
When the trains came in the covered wagon's place was jeapordized. Automobiles caused the horse industry to collapse. When IC's came in, the Japanese transistor radio industry collapsed overnight.
The Internet has come and we see the frantic attempts by entrenched businesses to hold on to the value of their property, to not change. But I think the bucket has too many holes in it. The recording industry may change its focus to the live concert industry. That at least is a tangible controllable poperty they have. Bands may have to get off they duffs and tour more. Prices may have to go up. Venues may have to get larger, if these captains of industry want to maintain their current level of riches.....or duck tape.
IMHO the article really makes the valid point that often time innovation does not have a future. If you make the wrong choice you get caught. It is then in the realm of forture telling to make a good long term decision. Take for example the inovation of the PC. Who knew at the beginning that that would take off. Or the innovation of the Internet. Or the innovations of JAVA say.. well that one is being challenged now by.net... here let me throw the bones to see which direction at the fork I should take so as not to reach a dead end, end up in the swamp or worse yet run in to robbers and theives and multiple toll gates.. thowing the bones... looking down... hmmm..
Maybe they don't get off from violating your privacy but there is ample examples of law enformement casting around to hand something on someone that they think is guiltly of something that they can't prove. If for no other reason then to have leverage to get a confession. Famous recent case in point.
http://www.law.northwestern.edu/depts/clinic/wro ng ful/exonerations/cruz.htm
Lets not forget that Law enforcement are people with the same frailties, ambitions character flaws as the rest of us and there are checks and balances in places like warrants to give some outside control over the additional powers given to those people.
As a matter of fact the procecuters and councel involved in the above Roalndo Cruz trial wenton trial for that abuse of power.
Don't get me wrong, Law Enformement is a good thing, laws are good things. But Like our system of government with its checks and balances, we have to maintain very careful control over power and keep watcheful of those who watch us.
Then there's the Patriot Act and Son of Patriot Act coming out. We are loosing a lot of the checks and balances and only time will tell if that is a good and stable thing.
" Why should a single person who has never missed a payment, never been late, never screwed anyone over by not paying back borrowed money and has a 12-month nest egg that he has painstakingly assembled be treated the same as the majority of people who live pay check to pay check, overspend their income, and do not act with restraint and discipline?"
Well lets rate people on how secure they are, especially looking at their stock portfolio and if any of those positions are risky, well that person is not of good character, even though they may have bough Enron before the crash, or World Com before the discoveries. Lets not talk about not having knowledge about those problems before hand, and lets not talk about having knowledge of your wifes spending habits before hand, and lets certainly not talk about your dedication to your pledge to stick with her through good times and bad until it was too late. And pets, lets look at whether your a dog person or a cat person. Do you have too many pets, of the wrong type (pit bulls for example, or tigers). Then there is the ever popular religious affiliation, yes or no,Which religion, which church,temple whatever, how much do you pledge. Then there's pollitical affilitation and political party affilitiation, did you contribute. What's your oppinion on the death penalty....... Some things are part of one's life not part of your employment or employer's database.
Lets keep it that way, even in the onslaught of the Homeland Securities increased powers to make unobserved observations that would otherwise be illegal and a violation of our freedoms and privacy.
Oh and lets not forget the tapping of business phones, emails and the camera's at work.. I know lets all move to Singapore.
I was viewing the patent link to this site last week. Guess what. The US Patent Office web site that dislays the patent I think is also not in compliance. Talk about Self referential humor.
Slapping my face, that was funny right, slap slap slap.
Slashdot Mirror
"Mere access to credit card numbers and the corresponding user list does not constitute a major threat, IMO. "
Well it is a major source of illegal funds for individuals and bad groups. So your indemnified, the Credit Card company or the insurance company isn't and if they get hit, you get hit, in increased rates or having harder to get credit. They are in business and they make money, your money. It just appears like it does not concern your pocketbook. Look at all the doctors going out of business or out of State because of a different kind of legalized theft by lawyers. Someone is making money here and its not you or me.
Sorry, the internet is not just for the initiated anymore. Not for years. The 10 minutes you speak of research only applies to someone who knows what a tcp port is and how to ask the question. Some people will never know what questions so ask of of whom and how to solve the problem. Most environment don't come with easy ways to do this. You often have to find (buy/download) software, install it (software firewalls and the like) then limit the ports. Knowing my own father who wants a PC hooked to the internet, these concepts are very foreign. He has'nt a chance of knowing what to do or what risk he is in. But he is not stupid.
The problem to use your analogy which I like is like living in a gang controlled neighborhood. The problem and fault is with the gangs, not the home owners sitting on the porch. I was talking about where the responsibility lies. Actually I would say its more like a good neighborhood that a bad malicious element has moved in. There is no excuse for their behaviour. It is not the type of neigborhood any of us want.
To compound the problem, no manufacturer or computer store is going to tell the consumer of the risks, well maybe to sell more stuff, but certainly not Microsoft or Best Buy, or Comcast. It is not in their best interests to tell people they are walking into potentially risky environments and that they need to be constantly vigilant and continually upgrade and patch to stay safe.
Part of that is software quailty and part is malicious behavior. Both of these need to be fixed.
Try going to someone in your family who has a computer but not in the business and not stupid and just see if they can find out what they need to do and how to shut down which tcp ports in 10 minutes. It might be and eye opener to the magnitude of that problem.
"Anyone stupid enough to allow incoming RPC packets from the internet deserves what they've got coming."
And I suspose that someone who drives down the street and suffers from a stray bullet from a bank robbery is stupid, or a someone sitting on their porch and is a victim of a drive by shooting. Lets not get confused with who is at fault and how malicious these things can be. There is not excuse for worm or virus creation. There is no justification for worm or virus creation.
The idea that people who purchase computers and hook to the internet are "stupid" if they haven't researched the latest esoteric system problems and downloaded and patched their home computer is elitist and wrong headed. Or that that unethical unprincipled people have worked hours and hours finding bugs in systems and designed code that will invade, possibly damage or destroy someone elses property, makes the victim "stupid" or the coder "clever". Lets keep some perspective about who is who and what is what.
No thats pay their fair share, get it right.
" Slap privacy on something and you can generate controversy pretty easily, but soda machines charging more when the weather's hot is nothing new."
.50 because it didn't, can you see how the sale of Guichi belts will drop off.
But, if you walk up to the machine and the numbers flip and charges you $20 for a coke because it detected the Guichi belt from the electronic ID chip in it, and the next person in line gets charged
There is a business model in consumables that is one price to everyone for this product. In barter societies this is different. I personally like the one price thing. The suggestion here is not barter but more like a silent auction behind the scenes to determain what the maximumn price they can get from you is.
The insurance company model is probably closer to this but for commodities from the same company I think it is just too greedy and sneaky.
Perceptions is 9/10 of the business. Your "Home Page" should have some "Home Security" don't you think. I think most people who have internet access feel that that is their private space, an extension of their home. The marketing image is such. You don't see an ISP tauting, "come with us, you can have a cardboard box full of your personal information that people can rummage through like a flea market offering". No they sell secuity and privacy and warm fuzzy service.
The RIAA onslaught attacks that image and could change the way people view the internet and maybe make that business dry up. Take as an example the Airline industry and how a little change in perception (as opposed to actual risk) can almost being down the industry. Another example is whats happened to Halloween. People tend to be very risk adverse when it comes to things close to Home or personal security.
So it is in the best interests of the big ISP's to show that they are fighting for that image if not the reality. If they went down on the other side of the issue the image damage might not be repairable.
So we have two business models fighting for territory and existance.
Now me, I'll sit in the stands and root for the home team.
I've heard that the RIAA is suing parents of offenders so it sounds like yes, you are responsible for your children legally. Go figure.
Can't decide if he went the right way? Haggis to snails?
"These are very tangible and reasonable criteria they're using to make these determinations."
As a part time university teacher I found out when one student was giving me trouble that he had been giving others trouble as well. I was not told of the trouble because that information would have biased my perseption of and treatment of that student. That is an important principle that may be violated here if "teacher" were to get ahold of that data.
Schools administrations would use the data for those things that were most important to them. This may include avoiding lawsuits, eliminating trouble makers. With limited budgets and overcrouded classrooms the insentives would be to diminish classroom size and be able to apply budget to where it would be most effective. You know the current political envirionment is one to privatize or business-tize all activity.
Now with that information would be very useful to at tracking teachers. Lets see, at teacher that has mass defections, well lets get rid of them. Or classes that have certain individuals attending, show scores dropping (trouble makers and cultural disruptors). The data mining capabilities are endless. But of course the adminsitrators would never think of using the data in these ways.
I am reminded of a story where a friend had a meeting with their boss. The boss offered them a project. They said they would like it. It was given to someone else. The reason was the boss said that even though she said yes, her body language said no. The same danger is here with the interpretation or "profiling" of individuals from scan data.
Kill them all and let God sort it out.
"Seriously as members of a community we are expected to contribute to that community as well as take away, other wise the community collapses. Voting is your way of saying this is the person/group I want leading the community. If you don't vote then you have no right to complain about who gets in.
"
I beg your pardon. Voting for someone you dont believe in compromises your integrity. We are not required to vote but our right to complain is sacrosanct and enshined in the Constitution.
You are suggesting a change in the basic fundementals of our society. I think that is a slippery slope to requiring prayer in schools or to answer those questions that lawyers always like to ask like "when did you stop beating your wife".
Damned if you do damned if you don't.
Lets all get those pet ID chips installed in our heads and be done with this freedom thing.
Just think how easy things will be. You go through the door to the store and it automatically debits you account. You automatically get debitted when you drive through the toll booth, and you will automatically be picked up when the new not elected Executive decides youre cost benefit ratio has exceeded your value to society. What a wonderful world we are destined to.
Are all those used CD stores in violation of copyright. There are big chains like Best Buy and little ma and pa stores making money of the resale of CD's. In this transaction the copyright owner gets no benefit. Is this a "fair use".
If so then maybe a model of selling the rights to someone to "own" the used copy say for a penny would suffice. If that system then no longer allowed you access to that copy. So the copy would have an owner for the duration of time that they were playing the music, then maybe offer it back up for sale. Micro Payment systems would be ideal for this. If you seeded the business with used CD's to begin with then the copyright holder would be out of the picture altogether.
The business could keep track of usage and sell that information to the media and companies to track on popularity and trends.
I am not advocating not giving royalty to artists (I have an issue when the copyright is held by a company and not the artist). I think that "creative people" should make resonable payback for their work.
But this used CD industry is a big one and alive and well in your neighborhood.
Is it an industry that the RIAA will try to shut down next (after the P2P networks and the kids and their parents)? or is this a "fair use". Or does it depend on the EULA that you agree to when you break the seal?
"The other side of the issue, of course, is the effect overseas. What has happened in China over the last 20 years, for example, is astounding in terms of the numbers of people lifted out of abject poverty."
Yes a very good thing except as China climbs up on the consumer economy bandwagon (as it is a a frightning pace), the world will suffer from additional load on oil resources, which are projected to reach half of global reserves gone by 2037 or sooner, then prices will just climb), Global warming, increased garbage and waste problems (now they are very ecological with the rural recycling of waste). We are all in for a treat with the largest population centers starting to heat up economically, India too.
We will have to find something new which we can have as our own special skill or service. We can't just be a country of executives living off sales to local consumers who dont have jobs because their jobs have been moved off shore. They will probably just sell to the consumers in these new markets making way for a greater seperation of wealth in this country. We have seen this trend since Pres. Reagan.
Actually the way that happens is a foreign company buys a company (fill in the countries) and then moves executive management responsibility out of country as well as move foreign people into local executive positions. In my case that included moving much IT work out of country, and selling all us software developers to an outsourcing firm, which sold us again to a different outsourcing firm. My IT outsourcing company (US based) is talking of outsourcing the heavy programming to India and Irerland. But I am still at the same desk doing the same job and expected to have some loyalty and professionalism when it comes to my company dejour and the company that I really do the work for that sold us several years ago.
Does anybody see the light fading.
Well Quick and dirty is good with an eye towards and hooks for the proper way. Its all balance and a good OOP interface can allow you to fill out the implementations later. You should not skimp on the interfaces though.
Refactoring I see is just another word for going back and doing it right the second time. In this situation. And the fancy term sounds like your giving value added, which you are, and you have continued employment....
I think there is a deeper issue here other than Field Proceedures of the FBI. The fact is that a crime was being committed. They knew it and with a phone call to the ISP caused the ISP to take some action. The victim's are all the users that get their passwords and information stolen.
The analogy would be that they have hijacked a store front to steal from people coming into the store front. The miss-directed traffic is not the real crime. The ISP only has some liability if the people who have had thier information and eventually money stolen, sue.
All the end users are the victims.
"It's your own fault for using IE."
I'm sure that people who are kidnapped and people who are robbed and people who are raped are all at fault.
This thinking is what falsely give hackers some sense that they are not doing wrong.
Oh, lets just go into that persons house and steal there money and burn their furntature.. Its there own fault for not having titanium steel reenforced doors and windows..
I love the arguments about surviving family and they are as I see it legitimate and beneficial. The idea of Copyright turns, intangeble thing into a property, an intellectual property. It is not a piece of land or a chair or chattle , but it has been turned into a legally defensible property. Where you can have a tug of war over a chair, with Intellectual property, there is no physical property to chain down or lock away. Its an interesting construction this idea of Intellectual property, a relatively new thing at that.
So we have made these etherial things into property and have to protect from "copying" because that cloning of the etherial is possible at no cost to the "owner" other than the loss of the ability to gain profit from selling their own "sanctioned" copy.
The Copyright law, like other laws of Intellectual property allow economic incentive to produce works so there is some benefit. The additional term extending the life of a "Copyright" allows extension of the idea the the owner has a family and has a right and responsibily to that family to its welfare. The property passes to them as part of his/her estate, for a time. This all make sense.
What doesn't make sense it that this property is also a commodity and is most often sold to a company (record, publisher, the company who pays your salary...) and that property is owned by that company who makes the profit from that Intellectual property not the author/creator or their family. This argument for the extension seldom benifits the widows and orfans but the Owners, CEO's and executive and shareholders (to a lessor extent) of
large corporations. Now there is the same argument for Intellectual property for corporations as incentive for doing researh but lets be clear on the motives behind the extension to copyright periods and who is persuing copyright infringment cases.
I would think a wonderful shakeup in the rules would be to tie copyright to individuals (possibly a percentage thing for teams), and that companies would not be allowed to hold or own copyrights themselves. That the the estates of the holders would recieve the property and that other arrangements, contractual arrangements for 'licensing' the use can still be made, but that the ownership remain with the creator. How many times have large corporations gouged artists and creators for their ideas. The Sears / snap-tool suit comes to mind.
Well in the corporate world, at least the world I am in, The large remote parent company in a different country has its Architecture Standards group the works out the standards for everyone and every thing.
One size fits all only if its clown shoes your wearing.
Lets be clear first that not everyone agrees on what intellectual property is, or how long it exists. Different countries, different times have had different takes on this kind of property. IP is owned for a time then goes into the public domain. That time was lengthened by congress essentially so Disney would not loose control of Steamboat Willy. The time was lengthened for the rights to be held on this "image" for 99 years I believe, up from what 17 years or 20 years passed the creators death, whatever.
....or duck tape.
The Electromagnetic spectrum used to be public domain. Now it is illegal to listen into certain frequencies. Talk about a human construction. Ham radio's in this country can't be sold if they can tune in frequencies that they should not.
It comes down to business and allowing people to have a monopoy for a time on some business they can profit from. They have lobbied in the governments for that right and have recieved laws to protect those monopolies. But it is a human construction and is not universal. There are peoples that still believe that no one owns land.
When the trains came in the covered wagon's place was jeapordized. Automobiles caused the horse industry to collapse. When IC's came in, the Japanese transistor radio industry collapsed overnight.
The Internet has come and we see the frantic attempts by entrenched businesses to hold on to the value of their property, to not change. But I think the bucket has too many holes in it. The recording industry may change its focus to the live concert industry. That at least is a tangible controllable poperty they have. Bands may have to get off they duffs and tour more. Prices may have to go up. Venues may have to get larger, if these captains of industry want to maintain their current level of riches.
IMHO the article really makes the valid point that often time innovation does not have a future. If you make the wrong choice you get caught. It is then in the realm of forture telling to make a good long term decision. Take for example the inovation of the PC. Who knew at the beginning that that would take off. Or the innovation of the Internet. Or the innovations of JAVA say.. well that one is being challenged now by .net... here let me throw the bones to see which direction at the fork I should take so as not to reach a dead end, end up in the swamp or worse yet run in to robbers and theives and multiple toll gates.. thowing the bones... looking down... hmmm..
Yes of course, if it didn't take a long time and allow our consulting firm to charge more billable hours, what would be the point?
Maybe they don't get off from violating your privacy but there is ample examples of law enformement casting around to hand something on someone that they think is guiltly of something that they can't prove. If for no other reason then to have leverage to get a confession. Famous recent case in point.
o ng ful/exonerations/cruz.htm
r uz .html
http://www.law.northwestern.edu/depts/clinic/wr
Lets not forget that Law enforcement are people with the same frailties, ambitions character flaws as the rest of us and there are checks and balances in places like warrants to give some outside control over the additional powers given to those people.
As a matter of fact the procecuters and councel involved in the above Roalndo Cruz trial wenton trial for that abuse of power.
http://www.nodeathpenalty.org/newab011/rolandoC
Don't get me wrong, Law Enformement is a good thing, laws are good things. But Like our system of government with its checks and balances, we have to maintain very careful control over power and keep watcheful of those who watch us.
Then there's the Patriot Act and Son of Patriot Act coming out. We are loosing a lot of the checks and balances and only time will tell if that is a good and stable thing.
Mines Beige
" Why should a single person who has never missed a payment, never been late, never screwed anyone over by not paying back borrowed money and has a 12-month nest egg that he has painstakingly assembled be treated the same as the majority of people who live pay check to pay check, overspend their income, and do not act with restraint and discipline?"
Well lets rate people on how secure they are, especially looking at their stock portfolio and if any of those positions are risky, well that person is not of good character, even though they may have bough Enron before the crash, or World Com before the discoveries. Lets not talk about not having knowledge about those problems before hand, and lets not talk about having knowledge of your wifes spending habits before hand, and lets certainly not talk about your dedication to your pledge to stick with her through good times and bad until it was too late. And pets, lets look at whether your a dog person or a cat person. Do you have too many pets, of the wrong type (pit bulls for example, or tigers). Then there is the ever popular religious affiliation, yes or no,Which religion, which church,temple whatever, how much do you pledge. Then there's pollitical affilitation and political party affilitiation, did you contribute. What's your oppinion on the death penalty....... Some things are part of one's life not part of your employment or employer's database.
Lets keep it that way, even in the onslaught of the Homeland Securities increased powers to make unobserved observations that would otherwise be illegal and a violation of our freedoms and privacy.
Oh and lets not forget the tapping of business phones, emails and the camera's at work.. I know lets all move to Singapore.
I was viewing the patent link to this site last week. Guess what. The US Patent Office web site that dislays the patent I think is also not in compliance. Talk about Self referential humor.
Slapping my face, that was funny right, slap slap slap.