...of a story i read. A developer on, Age of Empires i think it was, told how some guy had emailed him and demanded that he make a utility program for the game (unpack archives, convert graphics, something like that) and the developer told him to buzz off. Two weeks later the guy sendt the developer a program which did what he had originally asked him to make. He had just reversed engineered it.
So eloquent, so concise, so true! "Only people in emotional pain"... drink alcohol or coffee.
What's the point of longer sentences, you don't care - and i don't really care if you choose to believe or not.
And yes, if you pay attention, nobody likes alcohol or coffee at first - its an "aquired taste" which means along the way they rationalize that they like it. Alcholo is a poison to your body there is no rational reason to drink it, except it "loosen" people us, they are better able to deal with others, ie emotional problems right there.
Using a P2P service to download music to which you do not have the "copyright" is not stealing, its a copyright violation. The difference is, when you steal something people have demonstrably lost something - when you violate a copyright nobody have demonstrably lost anything.
Funny that, isn't it? Even though the RIAA and MPAA are claming that p2p sharing is killing their business, you never hear the adult industry complaining about p2p.
How would they put it? "We are are being screwed!" ?
Not quite. The best analogy I can think of off the top of my head is drugs. You don't target the users, you target the dealers.
Which is exactly why the drug problem hasn't been solved, and won't be solved as long as they continue with that. The dealer is irrelevant - the problem is that there is a market. Only people in emotional pain do drug, if "they" wanted to do something about it they would work to remove the pain from the users, then the dealers wouldn't have anyone to sell to...
I mean this most kindly, but in regards to what television is all about, I think you're missing the point.
Tv (commercial TV) is about making money. If you can reach a wider audience you can make more money. You can reach a wider audience via p2p distribution because you distribute to the world instead of a country/state. Where now people around the world (go through the bother to) download new episodes of their favourite tv series (West Wing, Buffy, Enterprise, Stargate whatever) many of them would love a legal way to do it - hey, many of them would even pay a tiny amount (notice the word tiny, if you start charging them megabucks for this they probably wouldn't) - and if you have a legal p2p network where had to register properly (and each account verified to make sure its not Donald Duck or Darth Vader who signed up) the advertizers would have much better demographics than what they have now. And you could set up a system which would stitch the show together act by act and insert different commercials depending on the user who requested it. (Ok, the latter would probably require a more centralized approach than p2p, but possiblities are out there - you just need to get rid of the current old fozzilised bosses who don't get it)
So you think that copyright law is "unfair" and "amoral" (I disagree, but that's a different post),
It is. Its sick for a group of people to expect to be paid over and over and over for work they have done but once. With what right would be plumber expect to get paid each time i use the faucet he fixed once? With what right does Madonna expect to get paid each time they play a song of hers? Take a movie like the Matrix, a great deal of people worked on that. Almost all of them were paid once, as is fair - but a tiny group expect to get paid again and again add infinitum. It seems that even Keanu Reeves feels a bit bad about this amoral system, and has decided to give some of his loot to other who worked on the film â" others who only get paid once. If one doesnâ(TM)t think this is an amoral system its probably because one is getting money from the system by not working....and you suggest...
Wholesale copying of the entirety of hundred or thousands of titles and making those copies available to an audience of strangers across the entire globe is not, and never has been, considered fair use.
Given that the copyright law is unfair (and amoral but that's a different matter) it may very well be fair for people to do this.
..is that most people treat P2P as radio/TV - and just as people don't run out and buy everything they hear/see on TV likewise they don't do it with P2P - and wouldn't have anyway - the loss is probably negligible.
All the Adobe products have had a *tiny' interface with small letters, and you can't change a preference setting to have a larger more readable interface (no - you don't need to have perfect vision to work with graphics)
Except the courts may not care about that. In Denmark people have been convicted based on screen printouts of Edonky screens! Some nerds have screamed bloody murder - but the court seems to say "yeah right, a file called "metallica - I'm a poor boy" thinking its something else" - and of course the fine people from the Copyright Police wouldn't dream of forging a scren dump.
Slashdot Mirror
...of a story i read. A developer on, Age of Empires i think it was, told how some guy had emailed him and demanded that he make a utility program for the game (unpack archives, convert graphics, something like that) and the developer told him to buzz off. Two weeks later the guy sendt the developer a program which did what he had originally asked him to make. He had just reversed engineered it.
Grrrrrr ;)
>>remove the pain...
>Enter Sybok.
That sounds painfull...
So eloquent, so concise, so true! "Only people in emotional pain"... drink alcohol or coffee.
What's the point of longer sentences, you don't care - and i don't really care if you choose to believe or not.
And yes, if you pay attention, nobody likes alcohol or coffee at first - its an "aquired taste" which means along the way they rationalize that they like it. Alcholo is a poison to your body there is no rational reason to drink it, except it "loosen" people us, they are better able to deal with others, ie emotional problems right there.
This supernaut wants a link, otherwise you're dumber than "My Documents"
Nope
p.p.s. I know completely happy, legal, self-made millionares who use recreational drugs.
No you don't - they only pretend to be happy. Its a psychological problem if you need to take drugs. Its not a natural state.
Idiot
Well, i suppose some idiots do do drugs simply because they are idiots.
Nope.
Stop stealing
Using a P2P service to download music to which you do not have the "copyright" is not stealing, its a copyright violation. The difference is, when you steal something people have demonstrably lost something - when you violate a copyright nobody have demonstrably lost anything.
Funny that, isn't it? Even though the RIAA and MPAA are claming that p2p sharing is killing their business, you never hear the adult industry complaining about p2p.
How would they put it? "We are are being screwed!" ?
Not quite. The best analogy I can think of off the top of my head is drugs. You don't target the users, you target the dealers.
Which is exactly why the drug problem hasn't been solved, and won't be solved as long as they continue with that. The dealer is irrelevant - the problem is that there is a market. Only people in emotional pain do drug, if "they" wanted to do something about it they would work to remove the pain from the users, then the dealers wouldn't have anyone to sell to...
I mean this most kindly, but in regards to what television is all about, I think you're missing the point.
Tv (commercial TV) is about making money. If you can reach a wider audience you can make more money. You can reach a wider audience via p2p distribution because you distribute to the world instead of a country/state. Where now people around the world (go through the bother to) download new episodes of their favourite tv series (West Wing, Buffy, Enterprise, Stargate whatever) many of them would love a legal way to do it - hey, many of them would even pay a tiny amount (notice the word tiny, if you start charging them megabucks for this they probably wouldn't) - and if you have a legal p2p network where had to register properly (and each account verified to make sure its not Donald Duck or Darth Vader who signed up) the advertizers would have much better demographics than what they have now. And you could set up a system which would stitch the show together act by act and insert different commercials depending on the user who requested it. (Ok, the latter would probably require a more centralized approach than p2p, but possiblities are out there - you just need to get rid of the current old fozzilised bosses who don't get it)
Except... : No profit.
so this is really where KaZaa 'comes to the table' and joins the establishment.
And users move on to the next program...
LOL
how easy is it to convert to MP3?
Its just the truth.
So you think that copyright law is "unfair" and "amoral" (I disagree, but that's a different post),
...and you suggest...
...you advocate...
It is. Its sick for a group of people to expect to be paid over and over and over for work they have done but once. With what right would be plumber expect to get paid each time i use the faucet he fixed once? With what right does Madonna expect to get paid each time they play a song of hers? Take a movie like the Matrix, a great deal of people worked on that. Almost all of them were paid once, as is fair - but a tiny group expect to get paid again and again add infinitum. It seems that even Keanu Reeves feels a bit bad about this amoral system, and has decided to give some of his loot to other who worked on the film â" others who only get paid once. If one doesnâ(TM)t think this is an amoral system its probably because one is getting money from the system by not working.
No.
No.
Wholesale copying of the entirety of hundred or thousands of titles and making those copies available to an audience of strangers across the entire globe is not, and never has been, considered fair use.
Given that the copyright law is unfair (and amoral but that's a different matter) it may very well be fair for people to do this.
What's your point? Oops, didn't have one.
Nobody is trying to ride on their coattails - its just retarded lawyers on ritalin going nuts again.
They didn't - you can copyright all possible permutations of lettre combinations.
And? Were any of them shut down by Blizzard?
... that Blizzard actually makes quality games - they would be easier to hate if they were also incompetent (like say, Westwood)
..is that most people treat P2P as radio/TV - and just as people don't run out and buy everything they hear/see on TV likewise they don't do it with P2P - and wouldn't have anyway - the loss is probably negligible.
All the Adobe products have had a *tiny' interface with small letters, and you can't change a preference setting to have a larger more readable interface (no - you don't need to have perfect vision to work with graphics)
Except the courts may not care about that. In Denmark people have been convicted based on screen printouts of Edonky screens! Some nerds have screamed bloody murder - but the court seems to say "yeah right, a file called "metallica - I'm a poor boy" thinking its something else" - and of course the fine people from the Copyright Police wouldn't dream of forging a scren dump.