I can't see a GPL'd movie being fundable, can you?
Movies are so expensive because there is a small group of very greedy people getting amoral amounts of money. If all involved got decept onetime saleries it would be much less expensive (Why should a carpenter who build a set get millions less than some guy in a suit who just happens "own" something imaterial)
Those who want the law reformed need to posit credible alternatives, alternatives that ensure that movies (and music and books etc) can still be made, before arguing that there's something inherently unjust in having to pay to have access copyrighted material.
Why?
Why shouldn't they argue why they should have some sort of god given right to make movies? If enough of the population does not support they way they do it they then don't have any right and should stop - laws or otherwise.
As the grandparent suggested, you have almost certainly never been involved in the creation of anything that can be pirated. But I bet you're utterly outraged at GPL violations, too. Those damn copyright infringers and license breakers... oh wait.
Art is supposed to be shared. (And don't give my any crap about needing to eat - fair ways could be thought out to cover that - "intellectual property" isn't it)
Easy enough we pass a law that only says a movie can only make back what it cost to make it plus a fair salery to all involved and the rest must be donated to charities. Instead of this imoral greed.
And here's the beautiful part: once they add an encryption layer to BitTorrent, it will be impossible to sue anybody over movie sharing. Thanks to the DMCA, if they sue you, they obviously illegally broke encryption somewhere along the line and would be liable themselves
That only works if nobody can download from BitTorrent. If someone can they must have a way to decrypt, ergo the industry just get a key that way.
But the sites themselves do not carry the files. They only have information about the trackers, and are not involved in the actual distribution or sharing of the files.
So how do they plan to sue them?
Because that's not the way it is: Their sole purpose is to break copyright law and they are helping people do this.
Because law is about how you phrase the argument: What they can say is that they are not selling virtual non real items they are asking for reimbursment for the their time spent, the object in itself is free. And there is nothing they can do about that.
Of course that assume someone has the guts/money to take a battle otherwise the big company usually win.
When you make a game with ridiculous exp requirements and difficult to get objects.
I predict there is no way they are going to stop this - short of changing their game. Remember, EULAs are something that laywers love and users disrespect.
I'm confused-if you're not going to play with other people, why are you playing a MMORPG and not just a normal RPG? It sort of nullifies the point.
I am SOOOOOOO tired of that! Why is there always someone who brings that up!!
People want to play THAT GAME, but they don't want to play multiplayer - they just don't have a choice. I would never join such a game to play with others, i prefer to be on my own - but since i can't (or it takes waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to long, i don't genrally visit. Of course he should have known that, but there you go)
Slashdot Mirror
...i was trying to read the nice old ladies website and it was down... you rascals! *G*
I consider myself to be decent,
So did Hitler, but you are both wrong.
Its amazing, because Avid is so lame with its tiny font size you can't adjust - baah.
One nation shutting down the sattelites of another nation or nations - wow, Bush is moving closer to WW3 every day.
I can't see a GPL'd movie being fundable, can you?
Movies are so expensive because there is a small group of very greedy people getting amoral amounts of money. If all involved got decept onetime saleries it would be much less expensive (Why should a carpenter who build a set get millions less than some guy in a suit who just happens "own" something imaterial)
Those who want the law reformed need to posit credible alternatives, alternatives that ensure that movies (and music and books etc) can still be made, before arguing that there's something inherently unjust in having to pay to have access copyrighted material.
Why?
Why shouldn't they argue why they should have some sort of god given right to make movies? If enough of the population does not support they way they do it they then don't have any right and should stop - laws or otherwise.
but again, this is different. These are broadcast TV shows that are going out over the airwaves anyway.
Not different in the eyes of the law. Don't like it? Vote for some other politicians.
As the grandparent suggested, you have almost certainly never been involved in the creation of anything that can be pirated. But I bet you're utterly outraged at GPL violations, too. Those damn copyright infringers and license breakers... oh wait.
Art is supposed to be shared. (And don't give my any crap about needing to eat - fair ways could be thought out to cover that - "intellectual property" isn't it)
When you can sign up for Netflix and get them delivered to your home for about 66 cents each!
But who wants movies? They are crap. You can't get tv shows and documentaries from Netflix can you?
Decent people have always thought it was wrong.
Since when did greed become immoral?
Always was.
Easy enough we pass a law that only says a movie can only make back what it cost to make it plus a fair salery to all involved and the rest must be donated to charities. Instead of this imoral greed.
And here's the beautiful part: once they add an encryption layer to BitTorrent, it will be impossible to sue anybody over movie sharing. Thanks to the DMCA, if they sue you, they obviously illegally broke encryption somewhere along the line and would be liable themselves
That only works if nobody can download from BitTorrent. If someone can they must have a way to decrypt, ergo the industry just get a key that way.
But the sites themselves do not carry the files. They only have information about the trackers, and are not involved in the actual distribution or sharing of the files.
So how do they plan to sue them?
Because that's not the way it is: Their sole purpose is to break copyright law and they are helping people do this.
It's in everybody's interest to have a system that is ligitimate and encourages inovation, and not blocking patents
Since when?
Why?
Because law is about how you phrase the argument: What they can say is that they are not selling virtual non real items they are asking for reimbursment for the their time spent, the object in itself is free. And there is nothing they can do about that.
Of course that assume someone has the guts/money to take a battle otherwise the big company usually win.
When you make a game with ridiculous exp requirements and difficult to get objects.
I predict there is no way they are going to stop this - short of changing their game. Remember, EULAs are something that laywers love and users disrespect.
Answer: It was during the Daytime.
Hm.. somehow i feel banging my head against the wall would be more entertaining.
I'm confused-if you're not going to play with other people, why are you playing a MMORPG and not just a normal RPG? It sort of nullifies the point.
I am SOOOOOOO tired of that! Why is there always someone who brings that up!!
People want to play THAT GAME, but they don't want to play multiplayer - they just don't have a choice. I would never join such a game to play with others, i prefer to be on my own - but since i can't (or it takes waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to long, i don't genrally visit. Of course he should have known that, but there you go)
I would still take a mediocre private education over the best our Government can offer, thanks.
That's because you have had a mediocre education...
Europ
Europe
This had led to speculation that the USA would simply shoot it down [blogspot.com] to prevent its use by hostile military powers.
Well, someone has to start world war 3.
Or you could stop making more hostiles.
(women should only wear dresses),
;)
So there are some redeeming things to Bush after all
...it's sad...