Used to be that ordinary Russians marveled at American openness, but now it's the other way round! You'll get arrested for taking a photo of the Brooklyn Bridge.
Assuming (big assumption) that Congress seeks to maximize "the Progress of Science and useful Arts", then the optimal "limited Times" must be determined, to seek a balance between rewards for authors and inventors, and benefit to society.
One week of copyright is not much incentive to an author. 100 years is not much benefit to society. I think 14 years is about the optimum, but have no data to prove this. However, it cannot be too difficult to determine the optimum, at least to within 5 years.
The current situation is primarily for the benefit of the authors, with promotion of progress only a secondary by-product. As such, current copyright law is unconstitutional.
The only way Socialism can be sustained, is through Totalitarianism. It confers "rights" on people, which entail taking from others against their will.
This might be good for Apple, but is it good for the consumer?
The larger, more diverse and more competitive the ecosystem, the faster the evolution. By this reckoning, who will come out on top? The User. Specifically, the Android User.
Grytpype:... and I warn you, nobody shout "Help". That is a word I've just invented and will cost anybody five hundred pounds to use. Now, give me that green liquid. Right, Neddie, into the canal.
Seagoon: But I can't swim without that green liquid. Aarrggh
FX: (splash)
Seagoon: You swine, you pushed me in! Help!
Grytpype-Thynne: Out you come, Ned. To using the word "Help", five hundred pounds
Just as the gun nuts have the NRA, we have the EFF. It must be recognized that this fight will never end, and vigilance must be eternal. Join freedom-loving organizations, call your friends and politicians, and vote.
"I'll give you my domain when you pry it from my cold, dead hands!"
Wealth can only be created by means of labor. The rich cannot create wealth simply by having it. Therefore labor can control the creation of wealth by withholding itself. The (idle) wealthy cannot get richer without labor. However, labor can generate wealth without the rich. This is why the wealthy need government to intervene to perpetuate their advantage, because otherwise labor has the advantage. The opposite will not happen.
The biggest threat to this country is unrestricted growth of the upper class on the backs of the lower classes. The government does have a very important place in the lives of the populace, and one of the primary roles is to protect it citizenry from abuses just like SOPA.
In my view, the growth of the upper class is a consequence of the growth of government - crony capitalism or corporate welfare, if you will. So the solution is less government, not more.
Seemingly, the whole agenda of the tea party is social inequity through government limitation and unrestricted economic incentives for the wealthy.
The government is the one giving out the incentives for the wealthy. Why do you want more of that? Please don't tell me that any benefits for the poor will not be captured eventually by the rich.
Look, the "practical" solution you propose is neither practical, nor a (long-term) solution. It's been tried in various ways, and there is ALWAYS a loophole or a creative way for money to find its target.
On the contrary, the only real solution is to remove from Congress the power to make such legislation. This will take away the reason for the existence of lobbyists, partisanship, and politicians clinging to their positions. The constitution attempted to do this, but the courts and we have been lazy and complicit enough to let them get their way.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." H. L. Mencken
"We fought for freedom and all we got was democracy." Pieter-Dirk Uys
Ok, so I assume you use a Monte Carlo technique to generate probabilities of outcomes. But does having supercomputers improve the accuracy of the results, with any certainty?
"It claims a physician administering thiopurine to a patient can infringe its patent merely by being aware of the scientific correlation disclosed in the patent..."
Please correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding of American patent law is that the physician will infringe the patent even if he is not aware of the patented correlation, and will thus be liable?
Slashdot Mirror
The Constitution seeks "to promote...Arts". If Marvel got nothing from the movie rights, would they never have published the comics?
If studios paid nothing for the rights, the public would benefit, which is the objective.
Used to be that ordinary Russians marveled at American openness, but now it's the other way round! You'll get arrested for taking a photo of the Brooklyn Bridge.
Assuming (big assumption) that Congress seeks to maximize "the Progress of Science and useful Arts", then the optimal "limited Times" must be determined, to seek a balance between rewards for authors and inventors, and benefit to society.
One week of copyright is not much incentive to an author. 100 years is not much benefit to society. I think 14 years is about the optimum, but have no data to prove this. However, it cannot be too difficult to determine the optimum, at least to within 5 years.
The current situation is primarily for the benefit of the authors, with promotion of progress only a secondary by-product. As such, current copyright law is unconstitutional.
cult = religion = cult = religion
Fine by me, as long as you pay for it all yourself.
It used to be that smoking was the leading single cause of statistics. But now the climate is gaining.
The only way Socialism can be sustained, is through Totalitarianism. It confers "rights" on people, which entail taking from others against their will.
Because we are spending twice as much per child in real terms as we were 15 years ago, with no discernible improvement in outcome.
No, we already have this right.
Upon reflection, I realize now that the military is sick and tired of IEDs, and would prefer to spend all day raiding, in front of a monitor.
Is all it proves.
Clear and present danger?
What could possibly go wrong?
This might be good for Apple, but is it good for the consumer?
The larger, more diverse and more competitive the ecosystem, the faster the evolution. By this reckoning, who will come out on top? The User. Specifically, the Android User.
and it always will be!
Grytpype: ... and I warn you, nobody shout "Help". That is a word I've just invented and will cost anybody five hundred pounds to use. Now, give me that green liquid. Right, Neddie, into the canal.
Seagoon:
But I can't swim without that green liquid. Aarrggh
FX:
(splash)
Seagoon:
You swine, you pushed me in! Help!
Grytpype-Thynne:
Out you come, Ned. To using the word "Help", five hundred pounds
FX:
(cash register)
Grytpype:
Thank you.
Actually, no. An engineer is a person who writes computer programs.
You left out shutting down the cell phone system: http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20091822-245/s.f-subway-muzzles-cell-service-during-protest/
Just as the gun nuts have the NRA, we have the EFF. It must be recognized that this fight will never end, and vigilance must be eternal. Join freedom-loving organizations, call your friends and politicians, and vote.
"I'll give you my domain when you pry it from my cold, dead hands!"
And why, pray, does a stock's value increase from $10 to $12?
If you had $100K, would you stick it under the mattress, or invest in a business? Which option would create the most jobs?
Wealth can only be created by means of labor. The rich cannot create wealth simply by having it. Therefore labor can control the creation of wealth by withholding itself. The (idle) wealthy cannot get richer without labor. However, labor can generate wealth without the rich. This is why the wealthy need government to intervene to perpetuate their advantage, because otherwise labor has the advantage. The opposite will not happen.
The biggest threat to this country is unrestricted growth of the upper class on the backs of the lower classes. The government does have a very important place in the lives of the populace, and one of the primary roles is to protect it citizenry from abuses just like SOPA.
In my view, the growth of the upper class is a consequence of the growth of government - crony capitalism or corporate welfare, if you will. So the solution is less government, not more.
Seemingly, the whole agenda of the tea party is social inequity through government limitation and unrestricted economic incentives for the wealthy.
The government is the one giving out the incentives for the wealthy. Why do you want more of that? Please don't tell me that any benefits for the poor will not be captured eventually by the rich.
Look, the "practical" solution you propose is neither practical, nor a (long-term) solution. It's been tried in various ways, and there is ALWAYS a loophole or a creative way for money to find its target.
On the contrary, the only real solution is to remove from Congress the power to make such legislation. This will take away the reason for the existence of lobbyists, partisanship, and politicians clinging to their positions. The constitution attempted to do this, but the courts and we have been lazy and complicit enough to let them get their way.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
H. L. Mencken
"We fought for freedom and all we got was democracy."
Pieter-Dirk Uys
If the bill passes (and even if it does not), let's all agree to meet again here in five years to assess.
I'll buy you a steak dinner if your predictions are correct.
Ok, so I assume you use a Monte Carlo technique to generate probabilities of outcomes. But does having supercomputers improve the accuracy of the results, with any certainty?
"It claims a physician administering thiopurine to a patient can infringe its patent merely by being aware of the scientific correlation disclosed in the patent..."
Please correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding of American patent law is that the physician will infringe the patent even if he is not aware of the patented correlation, and will thus be liable?