Many commercial companies will ethically compete with each other.
Strike down the antitrust law and see what happens. Corporate entities as we know them are by definition free market enemies. With one and only rule, the end justifies the mean. the en being profit++. The mean, anything goes.
You can take any member of any corporation as an individual, a good chance he's a man (human being) of ethics and principles, but as a group that corporation has one goal; profit.
http://www.thecorporation.com/ is a good source.
IMO, engineers (or any other student for that matter given he's not a egocentric prick:)) are may be more sensitive to some injustices in the world, because of what they now know (sometimes ignorance is a bliss they say). some, given a little push might react radically.
It's a simple Robin-hood / Hero complex, somebody sold then this idea "you're doing a good thing for the world". the price for this glory? either their life, knowledge or both.
PS: you can may be add to that : the fact that if one turns to his roots in a foreign country, most of the time it will be radical. always wondered why ???
1 - it's sole Rule should be impartiality.
2 - is should held accountable for that .
now if someone feels like discriminated against.. there should be arbitration to see if (1) wasn't met to enforce 2
With the new world order eliminating the huge production costs (you dont NEED a big studio full of gear to record a song anymore, you can do it in your garage with a PC, some software and some microphones to record with)
I wander why they didn't try to kill those products.....
An If I were you I'd stop buying music/movies all together wherever I am. This is a global crisis, an we should stick together regardless.
they may be first we're probably next.
If not misinterpreting in Canada it is criminal offence. To quote competitionbureau :
The false or misleading representations and deceptive marketing practices provisions of the Competition Act contain a general prohibition against all materially false or misleading representations. They also prohibit making performance representations which are not based on adequate and proper tests, misleading warranties and guarantees, false or misleading ordinary selling price representations, untrue, misleading or unauthorized use of tests and testimonials, bait and switch selling, double ticketing and the sale of a product above its advertised price. Further, the promotional contest provisions prohibit contests that do not disclose required information.
[...]
The Competition Act provides criminal and civil regimes to address false or misleading representations. Under both regimes, the Act prohibits the making, or the permitting of the making, of a representation to the public, in any form whatever, that is false or misleading in a material respect.
@Anonymous Coward
Stealing is stealing that's a fact that goes both ways.
Getting a song at 99c == album at the same price of a CD. without the cost of pressing the CD. what do I have to gain???? nothing what do I have to loose freedom (think DRM).
so buying a CD is more has an added value (well buying the track has !(added value) would be more accurate.
Some people buy the actual product after downloading off the Internet, some people download b/c they had bought the product at some point and lost/broke the actual physical copy. Don't start with the car analogy, you can't clone/copy a car, that's the big difference between physical and intellectual property, copying != stealing.
Some are simply opportunistic, they consume b/c it's for free, otherwise they wouldn't bother.
just like the assholes at grocery that eat grapes before they get to the checkout.
In this case the grocery will end up with -1 grape in inventory, they actually lost something. Downloading a song is not -1 song in inventory. It is a lost "potential sale", to my knowledge "potential" is not a fact, it's a probability. So "how can one loose what he doesn't have?" is a mystery (may be someone ca shed some light).
@girlintraining
Nice post, eventually the system will collapse sooner or later. The continued consumption of these products illegally (a way of saying F**** YOU Corporate pigs) will make it later rather than sooner.
On other thing that is rarely mentioned but oh how much infuriating regardless of anything else. Copyright on dead people work! it's utterly irrational, illogical, and most of all |STUPID.
yep you're right (although in my case it would be an MP --canada--).
nevertheless one should keep complaining, eventually it will resolve (hopefully I mean:))
does downloading/uploading files chunks (not having the whole file) hold as copyright infringement ???
or in other words the copyright is on the a file as a whole (??)
Participating in a torrent swarm that prohibits getting 100% of any file from one unique source, if one reasons in 1:1 nodes relations. that gives exchanging random bits of data not belonging to any one that IF assembled correctly may give you a file u can use.
would the exchange of those random bits/bytes constitute a copyright infringement.
ISP should have nothing to do with this... (is postal service (carrier) responsible for the drugs/copied CD/DVDs they deliver ????)
notice and notice. where a fundamental constitutional/human right is respected (presumption of innocence). right holder says "hey you're infringing" and here's why. burden of proof is not on the defendant!
and I totally agree with you there.
I was just pointing out that may be these fee are simply not for the phone but some kind of damage/penalty liability for breaking the contract.
same as with a cable company (plain old analog, nothing rented).. contract for 12 months, cancel before 20/month up to 200$ (If I remember correctly)
as it goes for Internet some ISP will lend you the modem (no monthly fees) which you;ll give back when you wont need it anymore. cancel before end of contract => return modem + pay fees.
and since they print it (I'm note sure here) in their TOS, it's legal way to squeeze few hundreds out of the clients (as a parting gift of a sort)
what would you say about the early payment fee on a mortage ?:) (Not that I'm ok with that)
I think their justification of these fee among other things is damage. You promised to stay with them for X years but you broke that promise so you cough up the bucks.
yet they do it... ISPs offer you the option to buy your modem or rent it (agreed the price is ridiculous but still)
cable/sat distributors let you either buy or rent the STB (especially hi end ones HD PVRs)
agreed to the point where:
in US no way in hell to get an unlocked cell, even if you pay it up front full price.
Neither in here (canada).
In a truly free/fair market you would have at least the choice.
So indirectly the consumer are forced to buy subsidized phones (why the hell would I pay full retail price for a locked phone ????).
IPhone is the worst. cant buy it full price (let alone unlcoked), you want it ? it comes with 3 years contract with DATA access (no way you take it just to use it as a phone/mp3 player and connect to wifi home or any hotspot out there).
Rogers had it first (fido later) exclusively for almost (may be more) 2 years now, the other 2 big joined now (BELL and TELUS), guess what ? same shit diffrente package.
Slashdot Mirror
Many commercial companies will ethically compete with each other.
Strike down the antitrust law and see what happens. Corporate entities as we know them are by definition free market enemies. With one and only rule, the end justifies the mean. the en being profit++. The mean, anything goes.
You can take any member of any corporation as an individual, a good chance he's a man (human being) of ethics and principles, but as a group that corporation has one goal; profit. http://www.thecorporation.com/ is a good source.
so it seams, I didn't see that one.
it is very sad.
IMO, engineers (or any other student for that matter given he's not a egocentric prick :)) are may be more sensitive to some injustices in the world, because of what they now know (sometimes ignorance is a bliss they say). some, given a little push might react radically.
It's a simple Robin-hood / Hero complex, somebody sold then this idea "you're doing a good thing for the world". the price for this glory? either their life, knowledge or both.
PS: you can may be add to that : the fact that if one turns to his roots in a foreign country, most of the time it will be radical. always wondered why ???
That law in France was declared unconstitutional by there "Conseil constitutionnel" (constitutional council) http://www.boingboing.net/2009/06/10/frances-three-strike.html
do you mean we have no choice ??? elect this guy or we're doomed ???
yet to some porn is some kind of art ...
agreed relevance doesn't really need regulations, it needs more research!
yep .. makes more sense
of course relevancy is implied ...
1 - it's sole Rule should be impartiality. .. there should be arbitration to see if (1) wasn't met to enforce 2
2 - is should held accountable for that .
now if someone feels like discriminated against
relevant == giving all answers to my question (request)
impartial == giving ALL possible answer that you have to my question (request)
With the new world order eliminating the huge production costs (you dont NEED a big studio full of gear to record a song anymore, you can do it in your garage with a PC, some software and some microphones to record with)
I wander why they didn't try to kill those products .....
An If I were you I'd stop buying music/movies all together wherever I am. This is a global crisis, an we should stick together regardless.
they may be first we're probably next.
Yeah, the audacity of doing this is more troubling. ....
Either their lawyers are plain stupid or
[...] — seemingly almost criminally — [...]
If not misinterpreting in Canada it is criminal offence. To quote competitionbureau :
The false or misleading representations and deceptive marketing practices provisions of the Competition Act contain a general prohibition against all materially false or misleading representations. They also prohibit making performance representations which are not based on adequate and proper tests, misleading warranties and guarantees, false or misleading ordinary selling price representations, untrue, misleading or unauthorized use of tests and testimonials, bait and switch selling, double ticketing and the sale of a product above its advertised price. Further, the promotional contest provisions prohibit contests that do not disclose required information.
[...]
The Competition Act provides criminal and civil regimes to address false or misleading representations. Under both regimes, the Act prohibits the making, or the permitting of the making, of a representation to the public, in any form whatever, that is false or misleading in a material respect.
Stealing is stealing that's a fact that goes both ways. Getting a song at 99c == album at the same price of a CD. without the cost of pressing the CD. what do I have to gain???? nothing what do I have to loose freedom (think DRM). so buying a CD is more has an added value (well buying the track has !(added value) would be more accurate.
Some people buy the actual product after downloading off the Internet, some people download b/c they had bought the product at some point and lost/broke the actual physical copy. Don't start with the car analogy, you can't clone/copy a car, that's the big difference between physical and intellectual property, copying != stealing.
Some are simply opportunistic, they consume b/c it's for free, otherwise they wouldn't bother.
just like the assholes at grocery that eat grapes before they get to the checkout.
In this case the grocery will end up with -1 grape in inventory, they actually lost something. Downloading a song is not -1 song in inventory. It is a lost "potential sale", to my knowledge "potential" is not a fact, it's a probability. So "how can one loose what he doesn't have?" is a mystery (may be someone ca shed some light).
@girlintraining
Nice post, eventually the system will collapse sooner or later. The continued consumption of these products illegally (a way of saying F**** YOU Corporate pigs) will make it later rather than sooner.
On other thing that is rarely mentioned but oh how much infuriating regardless of anything else. Copyright on dead people work! it's utterly irrational, illogical, and most of all |STUPID.
or may be a permissive "derivative/continuation of work" clause of a sort. That would solve the stagnation issue.
one good example is "Brutal Legend".
Who own your congress-critter?
yep you're right (although in my case it would be an MP --canada--). nevertheless one should keep complaining, eventually it will resolve (hopefully I mean :))
that said, it doesn't apply in a US "context" ( since downloading == infringement ??), but in canada downloading stuff is not illegal. uploading is.
does downloading/uploading files chunks (not having the whole file) hold as copyright infringement ??? or in other words the copyright is on the a file as a whole (??)
Participating in a torrent swarm that prohibits getting 100% of any file from one unique source, if one reasons in 1:1 nodes relations. that gives exchanging random bits of data not belonging to any one that IF assembled correctly may give you a file u can use. would the exchange of those random bits/bytes constitute a copyright infringement.
ISP should have nothing to do with this ... (is postal service (carrier) responsible for the drugs/copied CD/DVDs they deliver ????)
notice and notice. where a fundamental constitutional/human right is respected (presumption of innocence). right holder says "hey you're infringing" and here's why.
burden of proof is not on the defendant!
and I totally agree with you there. .. contract for 12 months, cancel before 20/month up to 200$ (If I remember correctly)
as it goes for Internet some ISP will lend you the modem (no monthly fees) which you;ll give back when you wont need it anymore. cancel before end of contract => return modem + pay fees.
I was just pointing out that may be these fee are simply not for the phone but some kind of damage/penalty liability for breaking the contract. same as with a cable company (plain old analog, nothing rented)
and since they print it (I'm note sure here) in their TOS, it's legal way to squeeze few hundreds out of the clients (as a parting gift of a sort)
what would you say about the early payment fee on a mortage ? :) (Not that I'm ok with that)
I think their justification of these fee among other things is damage. You promised to stay with them for X years but you broke that promise so you cough up the bucks.
yet they do it... ISPs offer you the option to buy your modem or rent it (agreed the price is ridiculous but still) cable/sat distributors let you either buy or rent the STB (especially hi end ones HD PVRs)
what about cars ????? a car losses value over time ... yet you can finance ?
agreed to the point where: in US no way in hell to get an unlocked cell, even if you pay it up front full price. Neither in here (canada). In a truly free/fair market you would have at least the choice.
So indirectly the consumer are forced to buy subsidized phones (why the hell would I pay full retail price for a locked phone ????).
IPhone is the worst. cant buy it full price (let alone unlcoked), you want it ? it comes with 3 years contract with DATA access (no way you take it just to use it as a phone/mp3 player and connect to wifi home or any hotspot out there). Rogers had it first (fido later) exclusively for almost (may be more) 2 years now, the other 2 big joined now (BELL and TELUS), guess what ? same shit diffrente package.