Copyright has sweet fuck all to do with technological advancement.
That's patents you're thinking of which are a completely different thing which for some reason people love to mix together with copyright and trademark law and pretend they're all the same thing or even more than vaguely related in any way other than being about intangible imaginary things.
At least they're less obnoxious than the nutjobs on the other side who think that copying between 2 locations in memory while playing a file, displaying an image or running a piece of code triggers copyright and as such requires a special license distinct from the mere ownership rights that come with the disk you went into the shop and bought.
And there's a few buisness models which could net you money even with piracy.
1: Promotion. post some of your videos for free on youtube, embed links to where people can buy the full box set or DVD for their particular car. This worked for monty python and their videos aren't exactly hard to find on torrents. Make it really really easy to go from hearing about it to buying it. Make it easy to buy, sure I could find it on the pirate bay but it would take a few minutes and the download might be bad etc, my laziness works for you.
2: Stack em high, sell em cheap.Digital distribution makes this easy. If something costs bellow a certain threshold I don't think too much about it, my threshold is like 5 euro and it differs by person but don't charge hundreds per copy.
3: Be likable. Plenty of people will pay people they like for things they consider good. Tarn adams (google dwarf fortress) gets throusands of dollers per month in donations for a game which he gives away for free.
4: Ads, stick a few ads at the start of your video and even pirated copies can net you income.
5: If you go with Digital Distribution embed a unique ID somwhere in each copy you sell which you can link to who bought it. When it turns up on the torrent you know who to send the bill to.(or for even more fun, a pay up or else letter like the record companies do. You could net a few thousands without a fight.)
Not trying is the simplest way to not succeed. It doesn't matter if a billion people torrent what you make as long as a decent number of people pay you. But of course work is hard and it feels better to blame the pirates for your failure due to not trying than admit simple laziness.
So..... Discard sections of the constitution. starting with the right to bear arms(the fur is all itchy anyway).
moving on to discarding that whole fair trial thing, since "even if the crime itself doesn't warrant it." doesn't really sound fair even if it would work.
Then discard the right to be secure from unreasonable searches, and seizures (automatically searching all the houses for contraband) and then discard all the stuff about discrimination(singling out the hicks)
"Up until a few years before 9/11 you could have lectured the rest of the world on how to run a country. Now you're far more the problem than the solution."
And in that time the US government has taken far more power and individual rights have been eroded not expanded. American citizens had their guns long before 9/11. Which doesn't fall too neatly in line with your belief that it's the right to own guns and a weak government that's the problem but rather the opposite.
He was probably talking about the racism in the tuner diaries. Not everyone who believes a well armed populace helps to keep a government in line also wants to wipe out all the jews,gays and blacks.
I have no guns, I don't want any guns but I can still see it's a fairly sensible point of view.
If you live in a nice safe walled community with security guards keeping a gun close to hand is probably foolish since you're far more likely to shoot a neighbour or a teenage family member sneaking back in late at night. If you live in a shitty part of town, bellow a crack house and above another crack house not keeping a gun close to hand is even more foolish.
"makes you believe that a government powerful enough to protect against fraud and illegitimate use of force, won't be powerful enough to become that "tyrannical, omnipotent state" "
While George Carlin's "you have no rights" makes some good points what, right now, is keeping the government from ceasing all your property, having you raped to death and harvesting your organs? A large number of rules and regulations, many based on the bill of rights or constitution which truss the government up and limit what it can do, not physically and not perfectly but it's power is still limited to an extent.
A government can be extremely powerful while still bound such that it cannot use that power in many proscribed ways. there will then of course be a constant drift as it tries to expand it's influence and push the bounds of what it can do and people have to push back but that's a problem with any system.
"Sorry, your ideology and the conclusions it leads to, is retarded."
Anything is when all you attack is your own pitiful imaginary strawman.
Also, quoting catch phrases of a movie has value as well so from this point on the MPAA will be monitering all conversations. Anyone caught using their intelectual property in a social context without first buying a license from the MPAA will be fined $200,000 per offense.
If your company produced 2 products which were the same hardware but with different firmware(which loads of companies do) then you might be able to claim that it's merely an unfortunate coincidence that your method of cutting down manufacturing costs(by re-using the same design) also allows someone to flash it with their own code.
now if the company also provided the software or linked to or even talked about the software for flashing it would be my uneducated guess that would be a shot firmly in the foot.
They've probably patented some aspect that would make creating such a module problematic without a licence, like anything that handles their protocol. Then they just require that the keyspace not be flashable if you want a licence.
really? this is news? I live in europe and I and most of the people I knew texted like that. Teenagers like to talk, gossipe and plan meeting up. It's what they do.
because stopping all fishing in an area is far more effective? It's harder to police quotas than an outright ban in certain areas. They could have decided that over the next few decades their government is going to need more money so if they stop all fishing in large sections of their national waters they can increase their future income?
So it's not just calling for people to hurt or kill someone but also any non-vilent political speech calling for anything that could negatively affect someone else then?
So if you found a white power group and merely call for the deportation or imprisonment of all minorities then it'd be ok under Canadian hate speech laws?
Who knows, the flip side of my argument is that perhaps if recipes had been made copyrightable 300 years ago and someone could charge you money every time you used their recipe there would have been more investment in automatic food preparation(for the sake of consistency, avoiding unintentionally creating unlicensed derivative works and accounting of who has used what recipe) and we'd all have autocooks like we all have MP3 players.
When copytright law was written machines couldn't do any of that stuff for free. There were no CD players, Type had to be set and printing presses had to be operated by hand. Music had to be performed by a musician in person.
Slashdot Mirror
Copyright has sweet fuck all to do with technological advancement.
That's patents you're thinking of which are a completely different thing which for some reason people love to mix together with copyright and trademark law and pretend they're all the same thing or even more than vaguely related in any way other than being about intangible imaginary things.
At least they're less obnoxious than the nutjobs on the other side who think that copying between 2 locations in memory while playing a file, displaying an image or running a piece of code triggers copyright and as such requires a special license distinct from the mere ownership rights that come with the disk you went into the shop and bought.
I remember sitting in on a lecture on this 7 or 8 years ago.
It's facinating but I'm not sure what's new.
Do it anyway.
it sounds like a good idea.
And there's a few buisness models which could net you money even with piracy.
1: Promotion. post some of your videos for free on youtube, embed links to where people can buy the full box set or DVD for their particular car.
This worked for monty python and their videos aren't exactly hard to find on torrents.
Make it really really easy to go from hearing about it to buying it.
Make it easy to buy, sure I could find it on the pirate bay but it would take a few minutes and the download might be bad etc, my laziness works for you.
2: Stack em high, sell em cheap.Digital distribution makes this easy. If something costs bellow a certain threshold I don't think too much about it, my threshold is like 5 euro and it differs by person but don't charge hundreds per copy.
3: Be likable. Plenty of people will pay people they like for things they consider good.
Tarn adams (google dwarf fortress) gets throusands of dollers per month in donations for a game which he gives away for free.
4: Ads, stick a few ads at the start of your video and even pirated copies can net you income.
5: If you go with Digital Distribution embed a unique ID somwhere in each copy you sell which you can link to who bought it.
When it turns up on the torrent you know who to send the bill to.(or for even more fun, a pay up or else letter like the record companies do. You could net a few thousands without a fight.)
Not trying is the simplest way to not succeed.
It doesn't matter if a billion people torrent what you make as long as a decent number of people pay you.
But of course work is hard and it feels better to blame the pirates for your failure due to not trying than admit simple laziness.
Get back to me when you've managed that.
Were you at the con in ireland last year by any chance?
(He talked about it then as well, this isn't very up to date news)
Well he was talking about this at the last DWcon so I'd say it's true.
So.....
Discard sections of the constitution.
starting with the right to bear arms(the fur is all itchy anyway).
moving on to discarding that whole fair trial thing, since "even if the crime itself doesn't warrant it." doesn't really sound fair even if it would work.
Then discard the right to be secure from unreasonable searches, and seizures (automatically searching all the houses for contraband) and then discard all the stuff about discrimination(singling out the hicks)
"Up until a few years before 9/11 you could have lectured the rest of the world on how to run a country. Now you're far more the problem than the solution."
And in that time the US government has taken far more power and individual rights have been eroded not expanded.
American citizens had their guns long before 9/11.
Which doesn't fall too neatly in line with your belief that it's the right to own guns and a weak government that's the problem but rather the opposite.
He was probably talking about the racism in the tuner diaries.
Not everyone who believes a well armed populace helps to keep a government in line also wants to wipe out all the jews,gays and blacks.
I have no guns, I don't want any guns but I can still see it's a fairly sensible point of view.
If you live in a nice safe walled community with security guards keeping a gun close to hand is probably foolish since you're far more likely to shoot a neighbour or a teenage family member sneaking back in late at night.
If you live in a shitty part of town, bellow a crack house and above another crack house not keeping a gun close to hand is even more foolish.
"makes you believe that a government powerful enough to protect against fraud and illegitimate use of force, won't be powerful enough to become that "tyrannical, omnipotent state" "
While George Carlin's "you have no rights" makes some good points what, right now, is keeping the government from ceasing all your property, having you raped to death and harvesting your organs?
A large number of rules and regulations, many based on the bill of rights or constitution which truss the government up and limit what it can do, not physically and not perfectly but it's power is still limited to an extent.
A government can be extremely powerful while still bound such that it cannot use that power in many proscribed ways.
there will then of course be a constant drift as it tries to expand it's influence and push the bounds of what it can do and people have to push back but that's a problem with any system.
"Sorry, your ideology and the conclusions it leads to, is retarded."
Anything is when all you attack is your own pitiful imaginary strawman.
.com isn't specifically american.
Also, quoting catch phrases of a movie has value as well so from this point on the MPAA will be monitering all conversations.
Anyone caught using their intelectual property in a social context without first buying a license from the MPAA will be fined $200,000 per offense.
damn
*Royal
I'm surprised this wasn't mentioned in the summary but she's also a member of the roay line!
http://www.anndeweesallen.com/LINEAGE.htm
If your company produced 2 products which were the same hardware but with different firmware(which loads of companies do) then you might be able to claim that it's merely an unfortunate coincidence that your method of cutting down manufacturing costs(by re-using the same design) also allows someone to flash it with their own code.
now if the company also provided the software or linked to or even talked about the software for flashing it would be my uneducated guess that would be a shot firmly in the foot.
They've probably patented some aspect that would make creating such a module problematic without a licence, like anything that handles their protocol.
Then they just require that the keyspace not be flashable if you want a licence.
Ya, that kinda is a more significant issue.
humans make me sad sometimes.
really? this is news?
I live in europe and I and most of the people I knew texted like that.
Teenagers like to talk, gossipe and plan meeting up.
It's what they do.
because stopping all fishing in an area is far more effective?
It's harder to police quotas than an outright ban in certain areas.
They could have decided that over the next few decades their government is going to need more money so if they stop all fishing in large sections of their national waters they can increase their future income?
I'm guessing TFA is talking about fishing rights sold to other countries or companies.
not local fishermen.
Presumably it ensures that there will still be decent fish stocks in the area in decades to come.
So it's not just calling for people to hurt or kill someone but also any non-vilent political speech calling for anything that could negatively affect someone else then?
So if you found a white power group and merely call for the deportation or imprisonment of all minorities then it'd be ok under Canadian hate speech laws?
Who knows, the flip side of my argument is that perhaps if recipes had been made copyrightable 300 years ago and someone could charge you money every time you used their recipe there would have been more investment in automatic food preparation(for the sake of consistency, avoiding unintentionally creating unlicensed derivative works and accounting of who has used what recipe) and we'd all have autocooks like we all have MP3 players.
When copytright law was written machines couldn't do any of that stuff for free.
There were no CD players, Type had to be set and printing presses had to be operated by hand.
Music had to be performed by a musician in person.