It doesn't matter how they're billed for bandwidth, as far as I'm concerned.
Your tiered solution sounds fine for the future (as long as there is no way around it), but the bottom line for these people is they broke the law and got spanked. You don't want to get spanked? Don't break the law. People know, or should know, that the cable companies don't fool around. I don't feel sorry for these people.
Thus, their uncapping is roughly equivalent to buying 9 more subscriptions and using all of them all the time.
Maybe, maybe not. I doubt the company allows households to buy 10 subscriptions, so it's hard to calculate... Especially if the bandwidth use made other customers connections drag.
Personally, I think these people should be forced to pay refunds to EVERY houshold in their area that could have been affected by a slowdown.
No. What I'm saying is that with the ease of storage and duplication, EVERYTHING is being archived in a hundred different places, probably more. No matter how pointless, it's backed up in a dozen different ways. Like I said - I bet I could find a copy of the most pointless text file I can recall from BBS days. And as ease goes up and price goes down, more and more will be stored... And moved from media type to media type.
How many artists have become famous after their deaths? Think about it...
Not that this has anything to do with what we are talking about, but that's actually something of a myth. Most famous artists were famous while they were alive as well. There are a few exceptions, of course, but most artists we revere today were relatively well known in their day... Many were actually "art stars".
With digital media, it holds even more water, I'd say. Consider the fact that, today, 15 years later, I can still track down any obscure text file that I once read in the BBS days. If the file no longer exists anywhere, in any archive, then it's unlikely anyone will miss it. And as storage media sizes grow, the unfettered archiving of the past will only become more prevelant.
Many games available on Abandonware sites do not exist somewhere in corporate archives, because the game companies simply went under -- there was no sale of assets, not buy-out by a bigger company. Just a quite whimper. Even though there was a threat (to society) of that information being lost forever... there was no attempt or requirement to make it public.
If no one has a copy of it, it probably isn't socially relevant enough for it's loss to be a threat to society.
So here you have the basis of the problem: Copyright is a LEGAL measure to prevent you from distributing something; but when Copyright expires you have no LEGAL resource to FORCE distribution. If the (elapsed) owner simply doesn't make a copy available, you can't force him to.
Why should you be able to? Surely, in your Disney example, even if the "Mickey archives" were no longer copyrighted, the actual original drawings would still be Disney property. Why should Disney be forced to give those to anyone? The drawings are their property.
To use another example, if my grandfather had written a book, I wouldn't want to have to turn over his manuscript to someone just because they wanted the information it contained - even if the words were no longer protected by copyright, the actual manuscript would still be property of my family (and probably a treasured possession).
And I also would be against "forcing" people to make copies, as well... In my manuscript example, why should I be forced to take my time and make someone a copy of the hypothetical manuscript? They can find their own copy, which is relatively easy as far as digital media goes.
If you are a, for example, hair stylist, you actually pay the place where you style hair a fee to style hair there. The customers pay you. Yet, some hair salons offer insurance for their stylists.
Other industries like this include real estate - most realtors don't get paid salary, only commission. But they also can get insurance from their "employer", if it's offered.
I have worked in radio. Radio stations do indeed pay fees. I don't know the details of how much they are (I was a DJ, not a numbers guy), but as I understand it it's more of a flat fee, perhaps a fee per song x your wattage. These internet fees are a fee per song x listeners, which seems excessive.
1) Why would it fall down? It's not like you built it yourself, you just acted as your own contractor. The contractor doesn't build anything, they just hire the people who do.
Well, your comment was rather pointless, since games which require Windows to run constantly get mentioned on here... Blizzard games for example. Not like it's a new thing.
You can't do that, to my knowledge. But you can get online, then connect to their server and play with them (if they are running the DC-compatible maps).
Slashdot Mirror
No, copyright was enacted origionally as a censorship tool.
Back this statement up with facts, please.
You are suggesting that people not be allowed to do what they want with a physical item they have purchased?
That's crazy talk, man.
What's next? Cars that you aren't allowed to work on yourself, or even take to any mechanic besides the dealership?
It doesn't matter how they're billed for bandwidth, as far as I'm concerned.
Your tiered solution sounds fine for the future (as long as there is no way around it), but the bottom line for these people is they broke the law and got spanked. You don't want to get spanked? Don't break the law. People know, or should know, that the cable companies don't fool around. I don't feel sorry for these people.
Thus, their uncapping is roughly equivalent to buying 9 more subscriptions and using all of them all the time.
Maybe, maybe not. I doubt the company allows households to buy 10 subscriptions, so it's hard to calculate... Especially if the bandwidth use made other customers connections drag.
Personally, I think these people should be forced to pay refunds to EVERY houshold in their area that could have been affected by a slowdown.
It depends on how they are billed for the bandwidth. The data center I have my servers co-loc'd in charges me about $4/gb for transfers, for example.
Bandwidth is expensive. Monetary damage is still damage.
GT3 is available for the PC.
No. What I'm saying is that with the ease of storage and duplication, EVERYTHING is being archived in a hundred different places, probably more. No matter how pointless, it's backed up in a dozen different ways. Like I said - I bet I could find a copy of the most pointless text file I can recall from BBS days. And as ease goes up and price goes down, more and more will be stored... And moved from media type to media type.
How many artists have become famous after their deaths? Think about it...
Not that this has anything to do with what we are talking about, but that's actually something of a myth. Most famous artists were famous while they were alive as well. There are a few exceptions, of course, but most artists we revere today were relatively well known in their day... Many were actually "art stars".
...or maybe because the 1954 short story it's loosely based on is named "Minority Report"
Sneak in. It's not hard.
With digital media, it holds even more water, I'd say. Consider the fact that, today, 15 years later, I can still track down any obscure text file that I once read in the BBS days. If the file no longer exists anywhere, in any archive, then it's unlikely anyone will miss it. And as storage media sizes grow, the unfettered archiving of the past will only become more prevelant.
Many games available on Abandonware sites do not exist somewhere in corporate archives, because the game companies simply went under -- there was no sale of assets, not buy-out by a bigger company. Just a quite whimper. Even though there was a threat (to society) of that information being lost forever ... there was no attempt or requirement to make it public.
If no one has a copy of it, it probably isn't socially relevant enough for it's loss to be a threat to society.
So here you have the basis of the problem: Copyright is a LEGAL measure to prevent you from distributing something; but when Copyright expires you have no LEGAL resource to FORCE distribution. If the (elapsed) owner simply doesn't make a copy available, you can't force him to.
Why should you be able to? Surely, in your Disney example, even if the "Mickey archives" were no longer copyrighted, the actual original drawings would still be Disney property. Why should Disney be forced to give those to anyone? The drawings are their property.
To use another example, if my grandfather had written a book, I wouldn't want to have to turn over his manuscript to someone just because they wanted the information it contained - even if the words were no longer protected by copyright, the actual manuscript would still be property of my family (and probably a treasured possession).
And I also would be against "forcing" people to make copies, as well... In my manuscript example, why should I be forced to take my time and make someone a copy of the hypothetical manuscript? They can find their own copy, which is relatively easy as far as digital media goes.
To be fair, most consumers want windows preloaded, because they want to use it, and have no clue how to install it.
If you are a, for example, hair stylist, you actually pay the place where you style hair a fee to style hair there. The customers pay you. Yet, some hair salons offer insurance for their stylists.
Other industries like this include real estate - most realtors don't get paid salary, only commission. But they also can get insurance from their "employer", if it's offered.
This doesn't seem much different.
I have worked in radio. Radio stations do indeed pay fees. I don't know the details of how much they are (I was a DJ, not a numbers guy), but as I understand it it's more of a flat fee, perhaps a fee per song x your wattage. These internet fees are a fee per song x listeners, which seems excessive.
1) Why would it fall down? It's not like you built it yourself, you just acted as your own contractor. The contractor doesn't build anything, they just hire the people who do.
Sony's website spells it WEGA.
Well, your comment was rather pointless, since games which require Windows to run constantly get mentioned on here... Blizzard games for example. Not like it's a new thing.
My machine is 1 Ghz + GeForce w 64mb of ram + 512 mb of ram. No DVD-Rom.
You can't do that, to my knowledge. But you can get online, then connect to their server and play with them (if they are running the DC-compatible maps).
Except that the console games market is bigger than the PC games market, and growing rapidly, while PC sales are leveling off.
Uh, you can get stem cells from sources other than fetuses (fetii?).
Isn't this the creation of an underclass of humans whos purpose it is to serve the higher classes?
Maybe you should get out more. That's a pretty big leap, from growing a replacement organ to a genetically tailored underclass.
Uh, you can get stem cells without killing anyone.
Actually, I think "they" want the government to repeal the DMCA, not ignore it.
If you consider people selling you a product (that you don't have to buy if you don't like it) "being screwed", then maybe.